The New Tribe: Way of the Open Fist – Introduction


From: The Way of the Open Fist – Introduction


In order to sim­ply and con­cisely define our con­tem­po­rary posi­tion it is essen­tial that we look to nature and her eter­nal and immutable canons. In our accep­tance of her bru­tal yet beau­ti­ful admin­is­tra­tion, we find our­selves located atop a peren­nial pan­theon and sub­ject to primeval statutes. Evo­lu­tion deter­mines that ‘rolling back’ is rarely an option, and, to the rig­or­ously sci­en­tific and unsen­ti­men­tal, it is not in the least bit desir­able. Rev­o­lu­tion is there­fore not a rebel­lion against the sta­tus quo, no mat­ter if it is sum­mar­ily char­ac­terised by blithe inac­tiv­ity or impec­ca­ble equi­lib­rium. In anti­thet­i­cal oppo­si­tion to the ter­mi­nally sick indi­vid­u­als afflicted with an intel­lec­tual and spir­i­tual psy­chosis known today as lib­er­al­ism, and the hoary, grey ranks of rev­o­lu­tion­ary con­ser­v­a­tives, our own minds are free to analyse and accept the inex­orable truths extant in the cos­mos.

The ety­mo­log­i­cal ori­gin of the word ‘rev­o­lu­tion’ stands in marked con­tra­dic­tion to its mod­ern usage. The notion that human con­di­tions can effec­tively be ‘rolled back’ is the hall­mark of the tra­di­tion­ally con­ser­v­a­tive thinker, not the insur­gent. These ple­nary reac­tionar­ies are inher­ently antag­o­nist towards change and their espousal of polit­i­cal con­ser­va­tion – or social anaplasty – con­trasts starkly with the objec­tives of the true rev­o­lu­tion­ary. The true rev­o­lu­tion­ary seeks the end­less ampu­ta­tion of that which does not func­tion cor­rectly and craves growth and devel­op­ment. In this respect, the gen­uine, unadul­ter­ated rev­o­lu­tion­ary has been mis­la­belled a con­ser­v­a­tive. And who has mis­la­belled him and why? More point­edly, why should we give this topic more than cur­sory con­sid­er­a­tion? It is impor­tant because we have thus far failed dra­mat­i­cally to iden­tify who we are and where we are going (if any­where).

In his prodi­gious tome, The Descent of Man, Charles Dar­win made the salient obser­va­tion:

“It is not the strongest of the species that sur­vives, nor the most intel­li­gent, but the one most respon­sive to change.”[1]

In pen­ning this par­tic­u­lar plat­i­tude, the great nat­u­ral­ist inad­ver­tently rang the death knell for con­tem­po­rary con­ser­v­a­tive rev­o­lu­tion­ar­ies and lib­eral rev­o­lu­tion­ar­ies alike. It is clear to any human with an oper­a­tional brain — one which has not been rou­tinely steeped in regres­sive dogma for decades — that change is the ‘rolling for­ward;’ it is evo­lu­tion. While Con­ser­v­a­tive rev­o­lu­tion­ar­ies shiver, knee deep in the briny (the spec­tral man­i­fes­ta­tions of Canute) Lib­eral rev­o­lu­tion­ar­ies con­fi­dently attempt to drink the ocean into sub­mis­sion. Both impo­tently believe their respec­tive self decep­tions. Both are equally doomed.

Exis­tence is barely com­pa­ra­ble to sur­vival. The per­pet­ual con­no­ta­tions, which per­me­ate the lat­ter term, are sur­rep­ti­tiously absent in the for­mer. Per­haps tack­ling seman­tic nuances is not of momen­tous sig­nif­i­cance, but cor­rectly delin­eat­ing our idea so that it is not left off the latch for mis­in­ter­pre­ta­tion is of vital impor­tance. We, the White race, must sur­vive. If the reader is in dis­agree­ment with this cen­tral, defin­ing prin­ci­ple then he must recy­cle this pub­li­ca­tion or, if being viewed dig­i­tally, dump it uncer­e­mo­ni­ously into a con­ve­nient, vir­tual wastepa­per bin.

Not only must our race sur­vive, it is our spe­cial duty, and the respon­si­bil­ity of no other com­pet­ing tribes, to ensure this sur­vival. Our sur­vival is pre­dom­i­nantly bio­log­i­cal, but we must under­stand that lay­ing the foun­da­tions for the abid­ing con­tin­u­a­tion of our ide­o­log­i­cal legacy is almost as essen­tial. This sub­struc­ture, com­posed of adaman­tine doc­trine, will com­pli­ment our bio­log­i­cal sur­vival just as the beauty of our wom­en­folk cor­re­sponds, in har­mo­nious exal­ta­tion, with the nat­ural grace and ele­gance of our musi­cal com­po­si­tions, majes­tic archi­tec­ture, and writ­ten mas­ter­pieces.

Bio­log­i­cal sur­vival is our first pre­req­ui­site. With­out our cor­po­real pres­ence on earth, no amount of the­ol­ogy will raise us from an eter­nal slum­ber. If we suc­cumb to genetic extinc­tion (whether our DNA is com­pre­hen­sively con­t­a­m­i­nated and what was the Occi­dent is repop­u­lated by a race-​less, mon­grelised mass, or — though not a mutu­ally exclu­sive sce­nario — our chil­dren are uncer­e­mo­ni­ously butchered in their mil­lions) then our dreams will have been dreamt in vain and our dis­tinc­tive, sput­ter­ing can­dle will have be snuffed out never to flu­o­resce again.

In his 1976 National Alliance address[2], Dr William L. Pierce tack­led the issue of why we should sur­vive (an indis­putable asser­tion chal­lenged lat­terly by the most dis­eased minds imag­in­able) and attempts to for­mu­late a retal­i­a­tion to the inter­rog­a­tive adverb. Pierce’s response was both dis­tin­guished and unfor­get­table, but why had it become nec­es­sary to explain to an unmis­tak­ably remark­able and inim­itable eth­nic group why they should con­tinue to live, must surely rep­re­sent the great­est and most endur­ing tragedy of any era.

From Dr. Pierce’s address:

“Our pur­pose is the pur­pose for which the earth was born out of the gas and the dust of the cos­mos, the pur­pose for which the first prim­i­tive amphib­ian crawled out of the sea three hun­dred mil­lion years ago and learned to live on the land, the pur­pose for which the first race of men held them­selves apart from the races of sub-​men around them and bred only with their own kind. It is the pur­pose for which men first cap­tured light­ning from the sky, tamed it, and called it fire; the pur­pose for which our ances­tors built the world’s first astro­nom­i­cal obser­va­tory on a British plain more than 4,000 years ago. It is the pur­pose for which Jesus, the Galilean, fought the Jews and died 2,000 years ago; the pur­pose for which Rem­brandt painted; the pur­pose for which Shake­speare wrote; and the pur­pose for which New­ton pon­dered. Our pur­pose, the pur­pose with which we must become obsessed, is that for which the best, the noblest, men and women of our race down through the ages have strug­gled and died whether they were fully con­scious of it or not. It is the pur­pose for which they sought beauty and cre­ated beauty; the pur­pose for which they stud­ied the heav­ens and taught them­selves Nature’s mys­ter­ies; the pur­pose for which they fought the degen­er­a­tive, the regres­sive, and the evil forces all around them; the pur­pose for which, instead of tak­ing the easy path in life, the down­ward path; they chose the upward path, regard­less of the pain, suf­fer­ing, and sac­ri­fice that this choice entailed.”

The founder of the Cre­ativ­ity move­ment, Ben Klassen, expressed sim­i­lar, if decid­edly more com­part­men­talised sen­ti­ments, in his ambi­tious work Nature’s Eter­nal Reli­gion:

“These Euro­pean White Men, then, with civ­i­liza­tion in their blood and in their des­tiny, crossed the Atlantic and set up a new civ­i­liza­tion on a bleak and rock bound coast. It was the White Men who drove north to Alaska and west to Cal­i­for­nia; the men who opened up the trop­ics and sub­dued the Arc­tics; the men who mas­tered the African Veldts; the men who peo­pled Aus­tralia and seized the gates of the world at Suez, Gibral­tar and Panama.

“It was the White Race who pro­duced men like Colum­bus who crossed the unknown Atlantic; men like Mag­el­lan who first cir­cum­nav­i­gated the globe; men like Michelan­gelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Rem­brandt, Velazquez, Bernini, Rubens, Raphael and thou­sands of other geniuses who cre­ated beau­ti­ful and exquis­ite pro­duc­tions in the fields of sculp­ture and paint­ing; geniuses like Beethoven, Bach, Wag­ner and Verdi who cre­ated beau­ti­ful music; men like James Watt who invented the steam engine; men like Daim­ler who invented and built the rec­i­p­ro­cat­ing inter­nal com­bus­tion engine; pro­duc­tion geniuses like Henry Ford, inven­tors like Thomas Edi­son; such a prodi­gal genius as Nikola Tesla in the field of physics and elec­tric­ity; lit­er­ary geniuses like Shake­speare, Goethe and thou­sands of oth­ers, untold geniuses in the fields of math­e­mat­ics, in the fields of chem­istry and physics.”[3]

Like­wise, the perusal of Arthur Kemp’s Match of the Titans quadrilogy, or Dr. Pierce’s Who We Are, will iden­tify in vivid detail what our race is capa­ble of if unre­strained by crip­pling ide­o­log­i­cal levies.

How­ever cogent and inspir­ing the nar­ra­tive, it is with pro­fuse con­ster­na­tion that we must remind our­selves that such note­wor­thy men of our race exhausted their lives wrestling with the bewil­der­ment of a pop­u­la­tion who no doubt appraised, and con­tinue to eval­u­ate, the self fla­gel­la­tion of Dr. Pierce, et al., as a grotesque and tri­fling pan­tomime. An oppor­tu­nity was missed and the lead­er­ship of these men became for­feit because they held close to their breasts some ves­tige of faith in their race at large. At worst their tenets fell impo­tently before swine and, at best, reside raw and dor­mant in us.

The ques­tion of why we should sur­vive now fes­ters on the ide­o­log­i­cal shelf, while the appar­ently more con­se­quen­tial and urgent query of why we should seek the sur­vival of those who appear pre­pared to embrace eth­ni­cal sui­cide, trou­bles the psy­che of the des­per­ate racial nation­al­ist. One can exist as a homo/​trans/​bisexual; one can exist as a con­sci­en­tious objec­tor to pro­cre­ation; one can exist as an accom­plice to mis­ce­gena­tion; one can even exist as a dera­ci­nated and polit­i­cally igno­rant debt-​slave, but one can­not sur­vive for any length of time as any of these things. The over­ar­ch­ing prog­no­sis of our epoch is reflected in the look­ing glass of self worth, moral health, and tribal exclu­siv­ity: those who con­sider their sur­vival in the con­text of race have a slight but def­i­nite chance. The remain­der, even if a major­ity, will inevitably per­ish from this earth.

The appalling fact we must come to at least recog­nise is that the pre­pon­der­ance of our peo­ple will not sur­vive. Although this bit­ter state of affairs was not of our fab­ri­ca­tion, it is clear nev­er­the­less that no mat­ter how ‘sal­va­tion’ is pitched, our brethren have selected exis­tence as opposed to sur­vival; adopt­ing all the ephemeral appur­te­nances and lux­u­ries asso­ci­ated with their unholy pact. Hav­ing reluc­tantly received this infor­ma­tion and processed it, it is incum­bent upon us to carry on regard­less — we must not share this fate, which is indeed a fate far worse than death. Thus our per­spec­tive turns away from the major­ity of our folk and towards a dis­parate and increas­ingly more per­ma­nent hori­zon.

Sur­vival is the syn­the­sis of fuga­cious car­nal exis­tence and inter­minable pro­lif­er­a­tion. It is the glit­ter­ing prize of those who can over­come any obsta­cle, no mat­ter how seem­ingly colos­sal, and pay any price, no mat­ter how appar­ently pro­hib­i­tive, in order to seize it. Vocif­er­ously pros­e­lytis­ing to the stu­pe­fied mass of con­sumers, who now com­prise, and have come to epit­o­mise, West­ern civil­i­sa­tion, will not ensure the sur­vival of the White race. Now that we fully com­pre­hend, with­out reser­va­tion, why we should sur­vive, the task at hand is to for­mu­late and imple­ment a prac­ti­cal strat­egy capa­ble of secur­ing the sur­vival of those mem­bers of our tribe who are ready and will­ing to actively pur­sue our imme­di­ate objec­tive.

It is sober­ing to remem­ber that our shared right to sur­vive is carved deeply in the tablet of human endeav­our; we earn this right, it is not granted by super­nat­ural enti­ties or the syn­thetic cod­i­fi­ca­tion of mor­tal man. Wher­ever human rights do exist – typed, in legalese, on volu­mi­nous sheaths of offi­cious paper, locked within mono­lithic fil­ing cab­i­nets – they are unques­tion­ably sanc­tioned and but­tressed by irre­sistible phys­i­cal force and not a vig­or­ous sense of ‘human­i­tar­ian’ com­punc­tion or the ‘uni­ver­sal broth­er­hood of mankind.’ The ques­tion of why we should sur­vive can­not exist within the intel­lec­tual lex­i­con of the ratio­nal mind. ‘Can we sur­vive’ has, how­ever, estab­lished itself as the most acute and urgent con­tro­versy of our wan­ing age.

Given time, the cit­i­zenry of the West will come to accept its sur­vival as being of para­mount con­cern, but this sit­u­a­tion will not come to fruition due to the unde­ni­able truth of our doc­trine or the unre­lent­ing force of our argu­ment. Ineluctable racial strife, eco­nomic malaise, and the grad­ual, sti­fling repres­sion of the state, will com­pel our folk to trib­alise along eth­nic fault lines. Those who do not – who resist the intrin­sic, organic urge to sur­vive – will cease to exist and their genetic inher­i­tance will van­ish, never to play a role in the emi­nent and boun­ti­ful future that is to come.

In the Way of the Open Fist I will attempt to describe our posi­tion as enlight­ened evo­lu­tion­ar­ies as we strug­gle to sur­vive in hos­tile occu­pied ter­ri­tory. I will endeav­our to set forth a new moral code of con­duct, one which utilises our inher­ent effi­ca­cious traits and qual­i­ties, while employ­ing an organ­i­cally engi­neered Aryan Dual­ity; a vital enhance­ment des­per­ately required to tem­per, restrict, and cir­cum­nav­i­gate our cor­re­spond­ing defi­cien­cies. At the beat­ing heart of the New Code is the Idea, the con­clu­sive con­vic­tion that we, as stew­ards of our race, must ensure the sur­vival, pro­lif­er­a­tion, and devel­op­ment of our kind, no mat­ter the cost. This rep­re­sents the barest begin­nings of New Tribe think­ing — long may it continue.


[1] Charles Dar­win, The Descent of Man, 1871.
[2] A speech later to become known as “Our Cause” and widely cir­cu­lated around the Eng­lish speak­ing world.
[3] Ben Klassen, Nature’s Eter­nal Reli­gion, 1973.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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