It won’t be 12 million.  It won’t ever be enough

Posted by Long Tail Watch on May 18, 2007, 10:52 AM | #

Read here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Long_Tail

Hopefully the more thoughtful of the MR bloggers and commentariat can discern the implications of the “long tail” concept to political marketing as well as economics?

Now, in America’s “winner take all” political system, dominated by “two” (sic) parties, the practical influence is at “the head”, rather than the tail, catering to the masses.

But, if the aim is to dusrupt, balkanize, spread alternative ideas and weaken the hold of the centralized “head”, there’s some meat in that tail, no?

Constant “mainstreaming” and “moving to the center” may no longer be the future of an overarching metapolitical strategy.

Posted by My long tail on May 18, 2007, 10:55 AM | #

From the article:
“The Long Tail has possible implications for culture and politics. Where the opportunity cost of inventory storage and distribution is high, only the most popular products are sold. But where the Long Tail works, minority tastes are catered to, and individuals are offered greater choice. In situations where popularity is currently determined by the lowest common denominator, a Long Tail model may lead to improvement in a society’s level of culture. Television is a good example of this: TV stations have limited time slots, so the opportunity cost of each time slot is high; stations therefore choose programs that have the broadest appeal. But as the number of TV stations grows or TV programming is distributed through other digital channels, the choice of TV programs grows and the cultural diversity rises.”

Posted by Daedalus on May 18, 2007, 11:28 AM | #

The GOP has to be destroyed before anything will change. A similar situation existed before the Civil War. The secessionists knew they would have to split and destroy the national Democratic Party or it would continue to compromise Southern rights.

Posted by GT on May 18, 2007, 12:23 PM | #

When the Senate bill passes this graphic’s projections (EuroAm % 1790-2090) become outdated:

http://i1.tinypic.com/4zx5kbb.jpg

Click for visual:

http://www.usapopulationmap.com/usa_f.html

Posted by “Myles” at VNN.

Posted by a Finn on May 18, 2007, 12:59 PM | #

The safe politics of yesterday are dead. It is not politics as usual anymore. Prepare for the worst and act accordingly. But first, contact the numbers and addresses Fred Scrooby provided.

About long tail: The concept might be useful if there would be more coordination e.g. among nationalist/immigration restriction sites and their readers. It probably would have to be done according to the lowest common denominators, but it would still be good. We could e.g. ask every site in Usa to count, how many would participate in a demonstration in Washington to oppose immigration, organized with the lowest common denominators. That would mean, that everybody in the demonstration uses normal clothes and commonly decided slogans. There could not be slogans ranging from Brimelov to Hitler. Also every group would market the event with common advertisements to the general public and spreading them far and wide. Similarly any large action or campaign of influence could be prepared. We might find out that there are many more active people in these circles than previously thought. Permanent activist networks between these sites could be established. Worthwhile is thinking about common marketing and economic measures. Donations from every organization / site combined could finance a large anti-immigration campaign in major medias. The network could buy more cheaply (economies of scale) products to sell on the sites by the organizations (anti-immigrant or creative products just to earn money). Voting coordination and common lobby group could be arranged. It is more incentive to anti-immigrationists to vote a candidate, when they know there is countrywide common voting group. Politicians are more prone to listen such voting group.  Ideas could be spread more efficiently, like coordinated methods to resist illegal immigrants locally by opposing their state/county granted ID cards, land ownership, boycotting the banks that give loans to them, their social security etc.

Etc.

When the big network is working, it becomes easier to entice other organizations and people that are not nationalists or anti-immigrationists to join. Farmers fed up with immigrants. Nature preservationists. All kinds of normal people.

Good and useful article.

Posted by long tail on May 18, 2007, 01:14 PM | #

“It probably would have to be done according to the lowest common denominators….”

That is in fact completely contradictory and inconsistent with the long tail concept.

Majority Rights marches onward…..

An idea: instead of having to copy some word-number combination before posting, how about a Raven’s progressive matrices problem, with the correct answer required.

That would eliminate 99.9% of the posts, but would do wonders for the signal-to-noise ratio.

Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on May 18, 2007, 02:01 PM | #

Read this VFR log entry and entire comments thread for an opposing view.

One carefully protected from critique.

Paul Gottfried, Righteous Jew:

It is furthermore is silly to pretend that Jews have not played a DISPROPORTIONATE role in greasing the skids for our moral and social disintegration. To recognize this is to recognize reality. What is more dubious is that Jews have caused this ruin, without the enthusiastic support or at least cowardly acquiescence of the white Christian majority. Although it is correct to note the significant Jewish contribution to the present decadence, it is naive to think that Jews are the only culprits in what you and I deplore.

Reasonable JQ-aware WNs say nothing too dissimilar, yes?

Auster:

And in any case, as I’ve said, even if the primary or even the sole source had been the radical leftism, that belief has now become so mainstreamed that no one sees it as radical. It’s become the water and air of our society. So there’s nothing to be gained by acting as if the problem were those radical leftists (or those radical Jews). Arguing against radical leftism (or against Jewish leftism) accomplishes precisely NOTHING by way of confronting the mainstream, normative, liberal beliefs of the whole Western society that must be defeated if the West is to recover and survive.

Larry ignores Paul’s points and keeps on driving.  His assertion that jew-awareness accomplishes nothing in the goyim is dead wrong (if you want DEAD WRONG assertions about JQ-awareness and the best way forward for whites, asking a jew is always the best place to start).

Jew-awareness galvanizes the white brain that has not succumbed to disease.  It wakes the white man up to the fact that he is currently losing a war as old as humanity, a war he didn’t even know was being fought.  It wakes him up to the fact that he is being HOODWINKED.  It wakes him up to the fact that NO, this is not simply the movement of the tides, the planets, the stars.  This is NOT simply the march of the inevitable, but the result of people and their actions, certain people in particular.

In short, it pisses him off royally.

Who knows how much is due to jewry, and how much is due to ourselves?*  There’s a simple way to find out; put jews through a reputation Holocaust.  Shout to the world, for the next century and more, what they’ve done to us.  See them removed from politics, academia, media, and finance.  Then we’ll know how much of the problem is ourselves.

*Most of the energy involved in getting a heavy ball rolling on a flat, low-friction surface is the initial energy.  Once it’s rolling, it requires only an occasional nudge to keep moving.  Auster, douchebag that he is, wants us to pretend who got the ball rolling, and who is giving it the occasional nudge, and who will lean into it if it starts to slow down, is unimportant.

There are two main ways to slow the ball down.  One is to make he surface it’s on less friction-free.  The other is to kick the guy nudging it in the nuts.

As for all the crap about “is it anti-whiteness?” “is it tolerance?”  Bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, BLA!  “It” is not anything!  “It” is an insane mass of nonsense.  It’s anti-white in the sense that this is the upshot of all of it - that’s where all the roads lead.  It’s “tolerant” in the sense that “tolerance” is the main vector for the rubes.  It’s globalist in the sense that globalists are its main movers and shakers.  It’s jewish in the sense that the hand that will slap you if you dissent is a jewish hand.

It’s the race-replacement of Europeans.  How and why vary, “what” does not.  “Who” does not change much, either.

I’ll add that the same applies to Europe, or at least to Britain. As became clear to me for the first time from listening to the British responses to the July 2005 bombing in London, the ruling principle in Britain is “tolerance.” It is not anti-whiteness. It is in the name of tolerance that they’ve allowed the creation of Londonistan.

But it is not out of a genuine concern for “tolerance” that any dissenters will be skewered.  It is a concern for self-interest that drives the skewerers: for jews, it is a group self-interest; for Europeans, it is a traitorous, individual self-interest at the expense of the group.  Why, sans jews, European self-interest consists of treachery and “tolerance” is a good question.

Philo-Semites like to point to Europe and its similar problems and pretend that means jews aren’t important to the equation in America.  That’s like being a drunkard with a dying liver pointing to a non-drinker with a dying liver and announcing his own liver cannot therefore be dying due to his drunkenness.

Then there’s the fact that Europe’s liver simply is not as diseased as America’s.  There is NO political opposition to race-replacement in America, while resistance is sprouting up all over Europe, even though Europe is roughly a third as infested with aliens as America, aliens who btw are largely Caucasoid and not as alien as the colonizers of America.

Here is a VFR article from January 2003 where I lay out ideas similar to those here. I argue that Paul Weyrich’s attack on “Cultural Marxism” (much like the Realists’s attack on the Frankfurt School) makes us believe that the problem is outside us, in those extreme leftists, when in reality the problem is within us, in our own liberalism.

Who is this “us”?  Auster and I?  There is no such “we.”

Auster is wrong, and Weyrich is wrong, and the Realist is wrong, insofar as Auster has characterized their positions; the problem is us and them.  Not very complicated - we’re like an addle-pated patient under the care of a shrink bent on our destruction.  We have to stop listening to him, stop taking the meds he gives us, and get control of our own thought processes.

Auster seems to want us to stay on the couch, keep paying his fees and taking his advice, and heal ourselves.

Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on May 18, 2007, 02:05 PM | #

Auster’s babe-in-the-woods routine is amusing, but I’m not buying, thanks.  He’s a saavy intellectual who’s been around the block how many times?  Yet, he sits there and would have us believe he can’t grok the idea that the left can be moved by a variety of motivations?  That “tolerance” is the packaging at the mass-consumer level, and “whites as cancer” is a galvanizing meme for the leftist intelligensia?  “Tolerance” is a good way to silence and confuse the average sucker, white “whites as cancer” is a good way to motivate the hard-core activist.

Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on May 18, 2007, 02:22 PM | #

Reading the from these sites gives me gas.  They’re such moral cretins, pretending to discuss issues when in fact rigorously censoring out any dissent.  For example, couple of links deep you can find Realist’s “eagle-eyed” crapola where I tried to make a short post about “wow, you guys are really piling on Jared Taylor,” and it didn’t go through.

That’s how you know you’re dealing with cowards.

The leftists at Alternet have infinitely more intellectual honesty and courage than either Auster or Jobling.

Posted by long tail on May 18, 2007, 03:42 PM | #

Fred, that’s the same link I already posted.

The meaning: it seems as per politics and society and “popular culture”, race realists and preservationists are in the “tail” - small numbers of people with “unusual” tastes and beliefs, often with schisms between each other for a variety of reasons.

Now, one wonders if many others are in the tail as well.  It seems that both the right and the left both complain about the lack of political choice, that the parties merge toward the “center”, and that they always have to choose “the lesser of two evils.”  American politics is definitely a mass marketing, lowest common denominator, tailored-to-please-the-many-weakly-than-please-the-fewer-more-strongly phenomenon.

With the internet allowing for easier distribution of memes, and with memes having no storage costs, it would seem that ideas and policies would be ideal targets of a long tail strategy.  Stop moving “toward the center” and start focusing on “satisfying” the sociopolitical needs, interests, and beliefs of all those more thoughful people scattered along the tail.

“Sell less of more” - more different ideas to fewer people.  The aim, eventually, of course is to shift the curve so that the memes you wish to promote move more and more toward the “head”, being believed in and desired by a larger and larger number of people.

The take home point: perhaps at least part of the nationalist message should be aimed at the tail.  If some wish to engage in centrist mass politics, that’s fine, if they can nudge the center further right.

But I think the real progress is going to be made identifying the dis-satisfied sociopolitical “customers” in the tail and providing them with “satisfying” alternatives.

Posted by Daedalus on May 18, 2007, 04:56 PM | #

My comments haven’t been appearing over there either. I reposted them at The Civic Platform.

The “Whites as Cancer Myth”: A Response to The Realist

http://www.thecivicplatform.com/2007/05/18/the-whites-as-cancer-myth-a-response-to-the-realist/

The Decline of American Renaissance, or the Failure of American Conservatism?

http://www.thecivicplatform.com/2007/05/16/the-decline-of-american-renaissance-or-the-failure-of-american-conservatism/

Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on May 18, 2007, 06:06 PM | #

Daedalus, looks like Civic Platform is proceeding apace.  Sigh, more reading to do! 

Posted by Ernest on May 18, 2007, 10:57 PM | #

It’s more than amnesty; it’s genocide for European-Americans

http://www.americanpatrol.com/GUESTCOLUMNS/MILLARD/GenocidalAmnScamHM_070518.html

Posted by a Finn on May 19, 2007, 04:54 AM | #

Long tail wrote: “That is in fact completely contradictory and inconsistent with the long tail concept.”

- Yes, do indeed take the Raven progressive matrices test before answering. Do you think that concept have to be taken exactly as it is said in theory. Part of it can be taken, and used in a new concept. Failure to understand this indicates narrowness in thinking.

There is more people in the tail than seems. How to get those people to do something useful for our cause? If long tail concept is used as said in original theory, we would have to in practice produce numerous different contents. Having been in this scene long enough, I know there is two major reasons why this does not work properly:

1. Lack of all kinds of resources and coordination among anti-immigrationist and nationalist circles to produce enough varied material in organized way.

2. People in these circles have strong opinions and convictions. They produce what they produce because of them. It is hard to find e.g. EGI nationalist who would want to produce material suitable for citizenist, or citizenist who would want to produce EGI nationalist material. This resistance grows stronger, if you want them to produce something that is in the tail, but is not at all related to their thinking.

To circle this, and still get the potential in the long tail, it is suitable to use the lowest common denominator concept. It is fairly easy to get varied people to work together because of something they all have in common and is important to them. Good things follow from this. According to real life situations and academic studies, when varied people work in a group/organization for common cause, they start to grind their sharpests edges and form stronger bonds and understanding between them. This bigger group then has the advantages and uses I described previously.

Still, I dont knock out the long tail methods completely. Some lighter version of it could be used alongside the lowest common denominator. Maybe at some later stages, when our structures have developed and grown properly, it can be used in it’s totality.

Posted by GT on May 19, 2007, 12:34 PM | #

How do multinational corporations and the U.S. Government plan to control us and the world?  I’ve previously mentioned the plan to tie food to increased cost of fuel, thus minimizing our physical mobility.  Now read the following and understand why our network of microcommunities must dominate the countryside, water resources, and electrical grid:

Impacts of biotechnology on the farming communities
Manjula V. Guru, .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Agricultural Policy Specialist
The Kerr Center for Sustainable Agriculture, Inc.
Poteau, Oklahoma, U.S.A.


Crop genetic diversity is not just a raw material for industrial agriculture; it is the key to food security and sustainable agriculture because it enables farmers to adapt crops suited to their own ecological needs and cultural traditions. Without this diversity, options for long-term sustainability and agricultural self-reliance are lost.

The type of seed sown to a large extent determines the farmers need for fertilizers, pesticides and irrigation. Communities that lose community-bred varieties and indigenous knowledge about them risk losing control of their farming systems and becoming dependent on outside sources of seeds and the inputs needed to grow and protect them. Without an agricultural system adapted to a community and its environment, self-reliance in agriculture is impossible.

Genetic engineering techniques have made possible the extension of the private ownership and patenting of life forms down to the level of the gene. The new patenting and intellectual property regulations will permit corporations to continue to freely appropriate unpatented seeds from around the world, to modify a single gene of these seeds, and then patent and acquire exclusive rights over them.

These new patenting laws are clearly designed to transfer the ownership and control of the world’s seed diversity–most of which has been developed and maintained by traditional farmers in the Third World–into the hands of First World corporations.

Meanwhile, seed/biotech corporations have been buying out or taking control of seed banks and smaller seed companies in order to reduce the availability of unpatented and non-hybrid seed varieties. It is in the interests of these corporations that farmers repurchase these patented seeds year after year.

There are two strategies now being used to prevent farmers from being able to save and replant their seeds from the previous year’s crop. Firstly, seeds may be engineered to be biologically sterile, like the hybrid seeds of the Green Revolution. Hybrid seeds produce high yields but do not perform well if they are saved and replanted, ensuring that farmers repurchase their seeds every year.

Genetic engineering now makes possible the creation of hybrid varieties of some common food crops that had previously proven too difficult or too costly to hybridize using earlier plant breeding techniques.

It will also be possible for scientists to deliberately engineer any crop variety to be sterile or non-reproducible. This technique, which critics refer to as “Terminator Technology”, has been patented in the USA, and will be used to target important crops such as wheat and rice. In these ways, the logic of “planned obsolescence”, and therefore the interests of the corporation, will be able to be engineered directly into the seed’s DNA.

Secondly, all patented seeds will now be legally sterile, as the new patenting and plant breeding regulations give patent holders rights which enable them to prohibit farmers from freely saving and replanting their seeds. Farmers either have to repurchase their seeds, or pay royalties to the company to save and replant patented seeds.

To help enforce these regulations, new DNA “finger-printing” techniques can be used to identify the genetic structure, and therefore the ownership, of crops growing in any farmer’s fields. For the first time in history farmers are losing both the ability and the right to save and replant their seeds. Yet it is these very practices of saving, replanting and crossbreeding seeds by farmers that have created the enormous diversity of domesticated crops and crop varieties we have inherited to this day.

Posted by GT on May 19, 2007, 12:43 PM | #

LeaNder writes: “The problem is leadership, Hitler thought, and than he took over with a little help by his friends.”

LeaNder (whose namesake drowned in the Hellespont) is a victim of his own propaganda.

A newsflash for ya, bud:  We are the Hellespont.

Posted by Tommy G on May 19, 2007, 04:01 PM | #

This is off topic but I wanted to give everyone an update on whats taking place with hate crimes bill, H.R. 1592. What’s happening is powerful Jewish groups are pressuring Bush big time to sign it. If Bush does indeed veto the bill, their next step is to attach it to a “must pass” piece of legislation.

http://www.forward.com/articles/jewish-groups-set-to-fight-veto-of-hate-crimes-bil/

Posted by Tommy G on May 19, 2007, 07:59 PM | #

“Right now Jews rule way too much over Euros.  We see the result all around us:  they keep trying to exterminate them.”

Yes, Fred, first it’s amnesty to make us a minority, then hate crimes legislation to shut us up. The next logical step is to ban private gun ownership so that we can’t defend our families against the non-white primitives or a government that turns it’s military on it’s own citizens.

Posted by Daedalus on May 19, 2007, 09:41 PM | #

Why does our side keep swallowing such nonsense?

Posted by Matra on May 20, 2007, 01:39 PM | #

At the Vanishing American blog I saw this link about the recent vote in Farmer’s branch, Texas to ban rentals to illegal aliens. Bill Brewer, a local landlord, made some interesting comments:

“This is not a good idea,” said Brewer. “This is going to increase tensions and make this a more difficult place for my kids to live.”

Brewer called Texas a state in transition.

“Anglos are going to be in the minority and we’re going to have to live with the majority. It’s only a matter of time before they start to take control.

“If we do things like they want to do in Farmers Branch now, then we’d better watch out. There may be a little pay back. It’s practical for us at one level to live and work together rather than promote these divisions.”

So he knows there could be “pay back” once whites are the minority but he still accepts the “inevitable.”  (Let’s hope when the Hispanics do take over their first action is to introduce strict rent controls and hurt Brewer’s bottom line.)

It is not just landlords who are sanguine about whites becoming a minority. In my personal experience the only whites who can be relied on to understand the danger ahead are from Northern Ireland, the former Yugoslavia, South Africa and, occasionally, Anglos who left Montreal when the Quebec nationalists came to power.  Whites not used to ethnic conflict have a difficult time concentrating their minds on the potential consequences of changing demographics.

Posted by Bo Sears on May 20, 2007, 05:39 PM | #

Bill Brewer, local landlord in Farmers Branch in Texas, quoted by Matra above:

“Anglos are going to be in the minority and we’re going to have to live with the majority. It’s only a matter of time before they start to take control.”

What many people don’t understand is that when Brewer refers to himself by the Spanish-language epithet “Anglo,” his fight is already over. There is nothing more fundamental to our existence than an understanding of who we are and that we have the right to a name we choose. When you adopt the labels of adversaries (goy, Anglo, shiksa, blanco, redneck, cracker, gentile, etc.), it really is all over for you.

If you don’t know who you are and if you internalize the name the invader assigns you, you are a loser. Ultimately, all you really have on which to build a culture & community is your name and the right to label, describe, and define yourself.

If you are one of the few who thinks the “Anglo” label is a cute short-hand way of saying “Anglo-Saxon” or just an innocent way of saying “English-speaking,” you are simply riding on the turnip truck driving to the dump in the marsh just outside of town with Bill Brewer.

As far as pay back is concerned, the debts to be settled go all the way back to the conversion of the Spanish & Mexican state of Texas to control by the USA, not to mention the Alamo. The need for pay back is taught in Mexican elementary, middle, and high schools.

Can anybody hear me?

Posted by Matra on May 20, 2007, 06:54 PM | #

If you are one of the few who thinks the “Anglo” label is a cute short-hand way of saying “Anglo-Saxon” or just an innocent way of saying “English-speaking,” you are simply riding on the turnip truck driving to the dump in the marsh just outside of town with Bill Brewer.

Since I used the “Anglo” label in referring to Anglo-Montrealers (as they call themselves) I should clarify that the term is not insulting in bilingual Canada where political divisions between Anglophones and Francophones have existed for centuries and nor does it refer exclusively to Anglo-Saxons. In non-English-speaking Europe references to “Anglo” bars usually run by Irish, British, or Australians, or “Anglo” book and coffee shops, usually run by Americans, is not intended to be derogatary either.

As someone who is not a United Statesian (as my high school history teacher insisted on labelling those who hog the word “American”) I use the word “Anglo” as it is used within the culture of the country I live in.

Posted by Bo Sears on May 21, 2007, 05:49 PM | #

While no criticism of Matra was made or intended, he has rejected a great deal of my point about Farmer Branch’s Bill Brewer.

1) The first thing to notice is that our Resisting Defamation analysis relies in no way on names being processed through one’s feelings to determine whether or not such a name is derogatory or insulting to oneself. Our argument is that a name or label by the other may be freely deconstructed, not on the basis of our feelings, but on the basis of what an interrogation of the namer’s reveals.

2) We have four elements we review with namers. One is whether or not the name smothers our richly-textured European diversities. Another is whether the person doing the naming has based his claim to name the other on a claim of supremacy. We don’t ask whether we are offended.

However, when the SPP program goes through and Canada, the US, and Mexico are unified in a EU-like monstrosity, we can all be United Statesians or Norte Americanos. It’s unlikely we’ll be Canadianistas, with or without the “Anglo.”

Posted by ben tillman on May 22, 2007, 12:34 PM | #

Bill Brewer, a local landlord, made some interesting comments….

He is not a landlord; he is a lawyer who founded the most disreputable law firm in Texas:  Bickel & Brewer.  He brought two of the suits challenging the Farmers Branch ordinances.

Posted by Daedalus on May 22, 2007, 02:01 PM | #

As a white Southerner, I don’t have a problem with the term “Anglo.” I’m actually quite proud of my English heritage.

Posted by Matra on May 22, 2007, 09:25 PM | #

He is not a landlord; he is a lawyer who founded the most disreputable law firm in Texas:  Bickel & Brewer.  He brought two of the suits challenging the Farmers Branch ordinances.

Today a federal court in Dallas issued a temporary restraining order preventing Farmers Branch enforcing the ordinance that 68% of its voters approved. The suit was filed by the ACLU and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund. That appears to be a separate suit from the one the landlords are involved in.