Sustained Action on the Path to Sovereignty -

Sustained Action on the Path to Sovereignty

The Nationalist movement in the United States, and other Nationalist movements, face many challenges. Most notably, they are opposed by the most powerful forces on the Earth, and those forces maintain their power through means that repel a mind prone to moral contemplation. To overcome these challenges, an intentional and cohesive strategy is required. What follows is one man’s attempt to devise one.

Portions of this aired as SurrealPolitiks S01E016 ‚Äď Sustained Action. Less than half of what is here presented made its way into that episode, and the reader would do well not to skip portions of this for having heard that show.

Zooming Out

Delving into the specifics of our plan will necessarily focus on measures which, taken individually, provide little inspiration to high minded and ideologically motivated Nationalists. Lest we fail to capture the readers’ attention, this necessitates a broad description of our purpose to illuminate the meaning of each step.

The basic idea here can be described as an effort to capture, through lawful political means, control of a municipal government. Then, using that territory as a base of operations for outward expansion of influence, and ultimate territorial sovereignty. A government by and for our people, complete with our own carefully designed citizenship and immigration policies.

To accomplish this goal, the strategy attempts to illuminate three key elements;

  • A well defined, but broadly acceptable, objective.
    • The Fourteen Words
    • Political Action Toward Territorial Sovereignty
  • Prominent challenges to achieving that objective.
    • Terrorism
    • Disreputable Officialdom
    • Censorship and Media Manipulation
    • Financial and Economic Barriers
  • Means by which to overcome those challenges.
    • Productive Industry
    • Property Acquisition
    • Political Migration
    • Political Capture
    • Territorial Expansion

In broad strokes, we attempt to identify and navigate current challenges according to the circumstances we are met with, accepting with all humility the compromises this requires. This is done in the interests of survival as we work toward establishing sustainable revenue streams through entrepreneurial pursuits.

The revenue of those pursuits are put toward providing geographically independent employment to our own people as we expand those industries, with surplus going toward acquiring land on which to house those employees. While making money will be a nice feature of this, profits are not the primary purpose. Contrary to primarily profit driven enterprises, which aim to reduce labor costs as much as possible, our goal is to increase our sustainable labor demand as rapidly as possible to accomplish a political purpose. We are using market principles to accomplish political goals. For more on this see SurrealPolitiks S01E006 – Misesian Socialism and Radical Agenda S06E009 – Economemetics.

The land acquired is chosen based on criteria explained in some detail in that section, but as a teaser here, we can say that a 200+ acre plot of land can be purchased for under $1900/acre in a city of under 1900 residents. That plot of land, if it were fully developed, could easily house enough people to outnumber the entire electorate of that city. We would be in complete control of the municipal government and only a rival migration doubling the population could hope to displace us. This would put us in control of a police department and provide us with taxing and local legislative authority.

The city is currently controlled by Democrats. If you know anything about me, you already know that I’d mean to flip that city Red. This not only provides us with power locally, it puts us in control of a segment of the New Hampshire Republican Party, which will help facilitate outward expansion.

Under the protection of that institution, we then repeat and expand all of the preceding measures, to include less mobile forms of industry, and widen the territory under our control to encompass defensible borders and sustainable natural resources.

With these in place, should the need arise, we may declare independence. and do all that comes with such a daring maneuver. Though the details of such a thing we dare not commit to writing so prematurely.


While the main points of overcoming the obstacles will warrant their own categorical responses and sections of this document, as we describe these challenges, we will conclude each section with some brief notes on mitigating these obstacles along the way.

While the writer encourages the reader to fully understand the entire scope of this presentation, those pressed for time and familiar with the objectives and challenges, may safely skip those sections, and get straight to the business of overcoming them.

Noticeably absent from this document will be any in depth discussion of public policy. This subject, though of tremendous import, is almost entirely theoretical until we have obtained political power, and is thus of minimal strategic benefit for our current purposes. Distant as we are from that objective, there is little sense in fostering dispute amongst Nationalists with such discussion.

Under our own territorial sovereignty, such debates will take on a vigorous and high minded character, the eloquence and substance of which will make for a rich history.

For now, we focus on the present, with an eye toward the future.

Limitations of this Document

This document is intended to be distributed publicly. Consequently, what it says to the friend, it says likewise to the enemy.

There are thus things it cannot say, and among the things it cannot say are what it cannot say.

The writer discourages the reader from inferring much from this. Speculating between the lines for clandestine meaning would be an unproductive use of cognitive bandwidth.

Invitation for Alternative Proposals

Not long after the writer published a podcast teasing this document, he received a letter asking about possibilities of carrying out such a plan elsewhere. The writer is not married to any of the specifics of this proposal, geography least of all. If somebody else has a better idea than New Hampshire, the writer is all for it. New Hampshire is only used here as an example on account of the writer’s familiarity with it, and the potential for synergistic effects with a pre-existing political migration project which has, in the eyes of many participants, lost its way.

In all reality, the most realistic proposal would probably be outside of the Untied States. In a world where all governable territory is governed, sovereignty can only be established in two ways. Negotiation, or war.

It does not take a military historian, only a consumer of TV news, to know which path the government of the United States will choose if it is met with demands to forfeit territory. The US government cannot summon the good sense to forfeit territory not under its jurisdiction in Eastern Europe. It will certainly not, for the sake peace, forfeit territory on the continent of North America.

Moreover, an ethnonationalist State governed by peoples of European ancestry, will have more than the United States to contend with in its young sovereignty. Governments all over the world will view this institution as a threat to their future plans, and will not wait a generation to stamp out what could, inside of a hundred years, set out on an expansionist project to correct historical wrongs. Every tool of warfare and espionage will be aimed at the infant nation, and flaws made during conception are likely to prove fatal.

For these reasons, and others, the territory must be able to stand on its own two without foreign trade indefinitely. The writer does not here advocate that the State remain isolated, but only that it must be capable of isolation in order to cope with external threats.

There are a number of things that matter in terms of choosing territory, a non-exhaustive list of which includes;

  1. Potential to encompass defensible borders
  2. Existing Demographics
  3. Price/availability of land/housing
  4. Likelihood of unlawful resistance by or assisted by Disreputable Officialdom
  5. Natural resources
  6. Unique political circumstances

The territory proposed in the letter mentioned, and common responses to similar proposals in the past, involves a landlocked US State. If that state were to secede from the union, it would be surrounded by its now foreign former masters, and this would not constitute defensible borders unless it joined with at least one other US State and thereby gained coastal access.

Otherwise, it would have no seaport, and would be dependent on its now foreign former masters for supplies, air travel rights, and everything else that involves the products and persons of one country traveling over the land of another country.

In the unlikely event of secession by way of peaceful negotiation, or, in the more likely event of negotiations to settle a martial conflict, what would be the negotiating position of the new State? What leverage would it have? The United States could simply say “Fine, have your independence, but if you fly over our military air space, we will shoot you down.”

While the new State might well establish its own formidable military, it would be the beneficiary (or victim) of its now foreign former masters’ capacity to defend its borders. The United States is not going to provide free military defense to a state which leaves the federation. They will demand tribute at the least, and the newly independent state would have no reasonable argument as to why it should not be made to pay.

If the territory under consideration happens to be in the middle of an important trade route, then that territory is going to face demands, potentially belligerent ones, for the use of that trade route, and this usage will be taken advantage of by intelligence agencies to seed assets into the territory.

That’s fine if you just want to get more people of like mind to your neighborhood, but this is not a path to sovereignty.

A sovereign country, especially a newly formed one who in its infancy made an enemy of the world’s foremost superpower, requires coastal access, fresh water, arable land, and minerals. If a country cannot independently feed and defend itself, it is not a country.

Short of Sovereignty

While this paper aims to make a plausible plan to achieve a sovereign nation, there are an infinite variety of interim and alternative goals that can be achieved using the concepts that follow. Small scale political migrations have the potential to rock politics in any place where winner takes all in elections.

Case in point: California Republicans and the End of Purple States.

There are over 5,200,000 registered Republican voters in California, but because of them being dramatically outnumbered by Democrats statewide, they have little political voice outside of some local elections. A similar situation exists in New York with more than 2,7 million registered Republican voters.

A fraction of those voters leaving their oppressive Democrat regimes and moving with purpose to swing districts in swing states could permanently alter the mechanics of federal elections and remove the Democrats from power permanently. With the Democrat threat neutralized, Conservatives and Nationalists could begin weeding out Mitch McConnell types from the Republican Party without fear of forfeiting control of the Federal Government.

It will be beyond the scope of this document to illustrate all the possibilities, but a research project to look at publicly available election results and voter registration data in a systematic way would produce very interesting possibilities. From there it is only a matter of resources and leadership.

Resources available for such a project include


Defining The Nationalist Objective

A common fourteen word phrase defines the unifying purpose of all factions of White ethnonationalists.

We must secure the existence of our people, and a future for White children.

This eminently reasonable statement is deemed terrorist propaganda by the government of the United States, and various foreign intelligence services parading as civil rights organizations in the United States and Europe. That they deem it a terrorist act to secure our existence and a future for our children, is prima facie evidence that they mean to exterminate us.

So, it should come as no surprise that it is also deemed terrorist propaganda to even mention “White genocide”.

Why is this the case?

These phrases are identifying a group of people, suggesting that they should survive as a people, and noting that there are those who would seek to prevent that from being the case.

There is no mention of violence at all, much less terrorism. But the entities that consider this to be terrorist propaganda, aside from being insecure and consequently paranoid, assess with some merit that those implicated in trying to exterminate White people from the face of the Earth have much to fear from these targets of extermination.

And of this there is some evidence. With at times startling frequency, men who become aware of what is being done to them, throw away their lives by shedding innocent blood.

Tellingly, however, it is not the targets of extermination that celebrate these events, but those who prompt the slaughter. They view these events as evidence of their success, in that those whom they aim to destroy are rendered incapable of organization by their subversive activities.

Case in point, one Roberta Kaplan. Kaplan is a lesbian Jewish attorney best known for discrediting the legal system by extracting judgements from reputable men with obviously fake lawsuits. Her victims include this writer, and his co-defendants in the Charlottesville Unite the Right Rally lawsuit, as well as the former President of the United States, Donald Trump. Among the other crimes she takes credit for are helping former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo slander his sexual assault victims, and subverting the United States Supreme Court to overturn laws prohibiting homosexuals from calling their sins marriage.

Kaplan told a publication known as Jewish World that she considers mass shootings evidence of her success.

We absolutely can and will bankrupt these groups. And then we will chase these people around for the rest of their lives. So if they try to buy a new home, we will put a lien on the home. If they get a new job, we will garnish their wages. The reason to do that is because we want to create a deterrence impact. So we send a message to other people that if you try to do something like this, the same thing will happen to you. And it already has been a deterrence. We’re seeing lone shooters now; we’re not seeing the kind of massively organized conspiracy we saw in Charlottesville. And I think that’s in large part due to our case.

Kaplan usually couches her language in lies about a violent conspiracy in Charlottesville, but here she omits mention of the alleged conspiracy being violent. This happened to be precisely the verdict reached in the suit. This writer and his codefendants were held liable for a conspiracy to harass, and this dubious theory of liability is the subject of an appeal before the Fourth Circuit.

Kaplan, and people like her, don’t mind violence. It is their preferred state of affairs, so long as it is kept a fair distance from them. That’s why they embrace and support Antifa and other mass criminal enterprises. Violence is chaotic and prevents organization.

Organization is what they fear.

Were the targets of Kaplan’s enmity to organize politically, they would obtain political power, and this would result in the destruction of all that she values.

This is as clear a signal as one ought need to determine our objective.

An organized effort toward the acquisition and maintenance of State power.

Ultimately, all politics is a question of force. Political success may be defined as the capacity to excuse violence in the name of the law.

Our political success will necessarily direct that force against the people who have tried to eradicate us, and while we are not terrorists, we can hardly blame them for being terrified.


The Problem of Terrorism

Nationalists face two main challenges regarding terrorism. These being terrorist acts committed against them, as well as such acts carried out in the name of their cause. These have synergistic effects.

The Nationalist As Terror Victim

Extremist Left wing organizations, aided and abetted by intelligence agencies, mainstream media, major corporations, law firms, and establishment political powers, have been given de facto license to commit violence to prevent Nationalist organizing.

Among the most noteworthy examples of this regime support is found in a handbook on the subject, written by Mark Bray. Bray’s “Antifa: The Antifascist Handbook” openly advocates for criminals acts of organized initiatory violence against anyone aiming to improve and maintain civilization. This text has been praised by elected Democrats, and prosecutors have declined to bring charges against Bray for advocating the violent overthrow of government under US Code Title 18 Section 2385. Bray has been brought on major television shows to debate the merits of terrorism with establishment figures such as from the Southern Poverty Law Center, and even in their disagreement, it is by no means lost on them that they are providing legitimacy to Bray’s advocacy by engaging in the conversation, as evidenced by their simultaneous refusal to debate their Nationalist opponents.

Without fear of prosecution, the perpetrators of these terrorist acts have had free run to commit assault, arson, and murder. Only a few token arrests have been made, and of those the vast majority have had the charges either dropped or pleaded down to petty misdemeanors.

Though these acts go back beyond the scope of this document, and begin far from the United States, most pertinent to our discussion is what may be described as a boiling point reached in August of 2017 at the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. Though some public Nationalist organizing attempted to continue, so did the assaults, and the one sided prosecutions against Nationalists for defending themselves. After a few months of this, such efforts became plainly unsustainable, and the Nationalists all but disappeared from the streets of the United States.

With the media fawning over their crimes, these groups raised millions of dollars and waged a campaign of terror that persists to this day. With Nationalists in hiding, the terrorists turned their sights on the general population. During the year 2020, they were granted exclusive license to break COVID lockdowns, during which they set fire to major American cities, including federal court houses and police stations. They murdered police officers, looted department stores, and throughout all of this mayhem, were actively supported by Democrats, while meeting scarce and largely rhetorical opposition from elected Republicans.

Nationalists are almost powerless to resist these attacks. Though they have proven capable in combat, those instances where they defend themselves, have seen them imprisoned by State and federal authorities.

Without a change in political forces, Nationalists can only hope to avoid these terrorists. They cannot be directly confronted without political support. 


The Nationalist as Terrorist

Seeing the wild success of this, Nationalists necessarily question the merits of such activity. If terrorists have political power, then perhaps terrorism is a means by which to obtain political power.

Were it only so simple…

Such a thought process confuses the order of operations. Leftists do not have political power because they commit acts of terrorism. They commit acts of terrorism because they have political power. A thorough analysis will be beyond the scope of document, but a cursory knowledge of history will show that with a small number of exceptions, which history records as successful revolutions, terrorism has a lousy track record of acquiring durable State power. Of those small number of success stories recorded as revolutions, most turn out quite catastrophic, with notable examples being associated with Mao Zedong and Vladimir Lenin.

Because of this, Nationalists are subverted by their enemies with messages supporting terrorism and revolution. They are deterred from political organization with messages of hopelessness and conspiratorial nonsense. Their leaders are slandered, undermined, violently attacked, and dragged through legal entanglements. Without leaders, individuals seeing no means by which to direct their energy, resort to lone suicide attacks. This is what Kaplan and her kind take pride in.

Such acts serve as propaganda victories for their enemies. The media apparatus, quick to deem Leftist violence as “mostly peaceful racial justice demonstrations”, seize upon the most preposterous allegations against Nationalists as evidence that they are threats to National Security. These media reports are used by intelligence agencies to bypass the restraints of routine law enforcement, and deploy the dark arts of warfare and espionage against Nationalist organizations.

This creates a feedback loop in which the espionage is aimed at the leaders, the leaders are removed, the followers have no direction, lacking direction engage in violence, and the intelligence agencies take this as justification for more subversion, resulting in more terrorism, and around and around we go.

Mitigating the damage of this cycle is vital to Nationalist organizing. The futility of attempts to avoid being slandered cannot be used as an excuse not to do this. 

Most terrorist acts carried out in the name of Nationalist sentiment are fundamentally suicide missions. They are carried out by hopeless people who see no future and would rather die today with deluded images of themselves as heroes and martyrs, than endure a lifetime of indignity watching their country spiral out of control while they sit idly by.

Nationalist leaders and media personalities, must combat, first and foremost, perceptions of hopelessness.

To do this, a decidedly non exhaustive list of vital measures includes;

  1. Avoiding, to the extent possible, apocalyptic language to describe political and social affairs. Consciously avoiding “black pilling” their audiences and supporters with reckless repetition or conjuring of unproven conspiratorial nonsense. The “system” and the institutions which constitute it should be described as targets of acquisition, rather than destruction.
  2. Restricting any content which could be described as “war propaganda” to individuals who have gone through at least a minimal amount of screening. Such material must not be publicly distributed or recklessly find its way into the minds of the mentally disturbed or substance dependant.
  3. Encouraging audiences and supporters to have non political social lives, and specifically those geared towards family formation. “Inceldom” should become rhetorically synonymous with “faggotry”.
  4. Discouraging alcoholism and substance abuse.
  5. Approaching with caution discussion of psychiatric medication. Publicly distributed content condemning this as a Jewish conspiracy or other social ill risks encouraging deeply disturbed individuals to go off of their medications against medical advice. Be though it may that this works out for the good in a majority of cases, there are those where it results in catastrophe, and these catastrophes are costly to the Nationalist cause.
  6. Encouraging physical fitness, educational attainment, professional advancement, and other sources of future oriented, non-political, satisfaction with life.
  7. Dealing with internecine conflict as mere differences of style or approach, rather than discrediting competing factions and personalities.
  8. Offering productive channels for the energies of ideological fervor that produce tangible results.
  9. Promoting a consistent cross platform message that one serves his cause better by living for it, than by dying for it, and still better by incorporating his cause into a more holistically satisfying, future oriented lifestyle.

These will be addressed in greater detail when we discuss productive industry.

Disreputable Officialdom

Closely related to the terrorist threat, are the issues of lawfare, espionage, and political resistance. These can be grouped thusly as they are in some sense the other side of the coin to terrorism.

These challenges fall under the umbrella of disreputable officialdom, but still ultimately present as physical force, and this of the sort no individual can hope to resist. They are categorically distinct from law enforcement, notably, because they are threats to law abiding citizens, and are ultimately disinterested in, if not positively averse to, holding criminals accountable.

As touched upon above, these elements of officialdom conspire with terrorism, and they have synergistic effects. Leftist terrorists cannot operate without assistance from officialdom, as absent this support their activities would be infiltrated and disrupted by law enforcement prior to having an impact. Of those few that still occured, the perpetrators would be quickly imprisoned or, better yet, killed. This would promptly prove unsustainable, and dissipate with a whimper.

Moreover, under a Just legal system, Nationalists would have little to fear from Leftist terrorists. They have proven themselves, time and again, quite capable of defending themselves against mobs of disease ridden drug addicts and perverts. They are promptly imprisoned and sued for this, however, because of the conspiracy with disreputable officialdom.

History is full of examples of private citizens with no political power, forcibly confronting the powers of the State. Near all end grim for the citizens, and are recorded as the above described acts of terrorism.

Addressing this category of threats presents a unique challenge to Nationalists.

In theory, reputable officialdom should stand ready to assist, but this has proven to be in scarce supply. Nationalists have done themselves no favors in this regard due to rhetorical errors which make them unappealing allies for elected officials who require popular support to maintain their positions. If agents of reputable officialdom do not maintain their positions, then they cannot carry out reputable acts through officialdom, and this tends toward an officialdom comprised entirely of disreputable individuals.

Dismissing election conscious politicians as cowards, and failing to distinguish between law enforcement and espionage, Nationalists have taken on the mantle of the “dissident Right” and many have declared themselves in enmity to “the system” as such. Reputable officialdom cannot conceivably assist efforts to “bring down the system” and Nationalists thus find themselves without any connection to powers that can confront disreputable officialdom.

Absent such connections, they are easy prey to criminals in the private and the public sector alike, and could fairly be described as “sitting ducks”.

To mitigate this threat prior to taking power for ourselves, necessarily must begin with what could charitably be described as an attitude adjustment for Nationalists, and an embrace of Realpolitik.

Nationalists must, first and foremost, recognize that truth and righteousness have scarcely anything to do with the machinery of the State. The State has no will save for that of those who control it, and may just as soon exterminate a population as protect it. The merits of the Nationalist’s cause, and their dedication thereto, provide no benefit to navigating these challenges, and all too often hinder such efforts. In short, Nationalists must learn humility.

Nationalism tends towards visions of greatness, and appropriately so. Likewise appropriate are moral sentiments, and conceptions of “higher aims” which warrant personal sacrifice and justify individual suffering. Whatever significant value there may be in Men willing to die and go to prison for the right reasons, such expenditures are very costly, and ought not be spent absent measurable expectation of return on investment.

Such high mindedness must be compartmentalized.

Outside of religious texts there is no historical record of divine intervention, and in this decidedly fallen world, it may help to embrace the Christian conception that we are all sinners.

All of us enter and leave this world with both the need, and the capacity, for redemption.

Reputable officialdom must be more broadly defined than Nationalists have tended to conceive of it. A politician who accurately predicts he will be ousted from his position by doing a righteous thing, is not necessarily a disreputable actor for declining to so act. His capacity to do good works depends on his position, and he does not maximize his capacity for Justice by forfeiting his position to lesser men.

Those falling outside the parameters established must be invited back into the good graces of the reputable. Declaring oneself in enmity to all that is imperfect makes for a lonely existence, as well as no small degree of hypocrisy, and no such existence can coordinate the alignments of diverse interests which comprise all political activity.

We are and must present ourselves as law abiding patriotic citizens.

With so much deception in the information environment, we must at all times remind both ourselves and those around us of this fact. We deserve the protections of the law, and it is a serious crime to deprive us of this.

Accordingly, we are not, and must not aid the enemy in painting us as, enemies of “the system”. At least rhetorically, “the system” exists for no other purpose than to carry out our will and to protect us from our enemies. This may be said to define the parameters of reputable officialdom. When agents of that system act contrary to this purpose, they fall under the umbrella of disreputable officialdom, and must be called upon to redeem themselves by acting reputably.

In this, it is helpful to distinguish between law enforcement and espionage. Police are not our enemy, so long as they act as police.

If people wearing police uniforms aid and abet Leftist terrorism, if they imprison patriotic law abiding citizens, they are acting in the capacity of domestic espionage, and thus, in the capacity of disreputable officialdom. In this, they do a great disservice to law enforcement, and law enforcement ought to be reminded of how these disreputable characters are harming their reputations. They ought to be encouraged to use their authority to weed out such hindrances to their righteous duties.

A law abiding patriotic citizen should be happy to see law enforcement. He should be happy to help law enforcement.

If he suspects espionage to be acting undercover as law enforcement, then he too should act in such capacity and resort to deception. He should then pretend to be happy to see the agent, and pretend to want to be helpful. He should pretend that he is dismayed by his incapacity to do so. In this, he maintains his image as a law abiding patriotic citizen, and avoids the risk of offending reputable officialdom through error.

These measures can only mitigate the damage we incur along the way. There is no substitute for good government, and good government can only come from good people. Good people can only come from wise immigration and citizenship policies, and these we can only establish through territorial sovereignty of our own.


Censorship and Media Manipulation

Acting at all times in concert with disreputable officialdom, is the Fourth Estate. Though typically described as the News Media, the term may now be conceived of as comprising those who shape the information environment. In this respect, tech companies arguably wield more power than TV stations and newspapers, who are now themselves at the whim of tech oligarchs.

The inspirational power of the Nationalist message is a threat to disreputable officialdom. Not only does it threaten to oust them from power, but to pull the most valuable members from their ranks, and back under the umbrella of reputability. It must be stifled to whatever extend possible for them to continue their activity.

It is obviously not good enough to deprive a population of positive messages. The information environment must likewise be polluted with lies and filth.

The writer assumes the reader to be all too familiar with these phenomena, and will respect the reader’s time by forgoing a lengthy description.

Such efforts are no simple task for disreputable officialdom. It is not possible to completely stamp out the messaging, and the general public has only so much tolerance for filth. Maintaining control over the information environment is above all a matter of reputation, and such reputations are more fragile than the average citizen might readily assume.

To be trusted in shaping the information environment is to be seen as doing nothing of the sort. The information must be perceived as being merely conveyed, sorted, and made useful, rather than molded according to the purposes of the information source. To illustrate the point, it would be conspicuous in the extreme to publicly execute all who dared to utter dissenting opinions. All the more so if the newspapers themselves conducted the slaughter. To do so would be to expose themselves as insecure manipulators. More subtle means, accordingly, are typically deployed.

Algorithmic suppression in search engines and social media has proven challenging for tech companies, to the point where they have discredited themselves no less than television and newspapers with heavy handedness. The original purpose of algorithmic sorting of content was to provide the most satisfying content to the user, and the deeply satisfying nature of Nationalist content caused it to proliferate and spread like wildfire roughly until August of 2017.

Though the most powerful messaging could be ham handedly banned as “hate speech” with minimal fuss from the average user, tech companies soon confronted the challenge of what they described as “borderline content”. Once they began trying to suppress this content, a perpetual shifting of the goal posts ensued. Whatever is out of bounds clearly has something on its boundaries, and at some point a perpetual hunt for the borderline eventually and inevitably results in the isolation of oneself rather than those he aims to isolate.

The result of this was the emergence of alternative platforms such as Gab, and Odysee, and the popularization of once obscure messaging systems like Telegram and Signal.

Heavy handed attempts to stifle the alternative platforms with interventions by infrastructure providers succeeded in destroying platforms like Parler and Wrongthink, but in their wake emerged others like Truth Social, Substack, and Rumble. These platforms do police content for ill defined prohibitions on “racism” but are, on the whole considerably more open than their older established competitors.

There is much to learn in all of this, much of which will be addressed in greater detail in our discussion of productive industry. For now, we may observe that there are limitations on how much newspapers and TV stations can lie before people stop taking them seriously, and in like fashion, there are limits to how much tech companies can suppress before market forces step in and alternatives emerge.

Prudent market actors learn from the mistakes of deceased trailblazers, and at the very least pay lip service to political demands for content moderation. In particular, those of the ethnocentric variety are given the utmost priority.

Successful content producers comply to the extent they can with the content moderation policies of the platforms they make use of. They use these not as their primary means of messaging, but as promotional tools. Rather than attempting to use these platforms as primary revenue sources, as many once did with YouTube, they may actually spend money to obtain promotional benefits, and use the attention they derive from moderated platforms to draw audiences away from those systems.

Among the most powerful means by which to retain an audience outside of a platform has been to maintain an email newsletter. Email is a protocol, rather than a platform. It is not (supposed to be) subject to centralized control. The usefulness of this has in recent years been mitigated by the deployment of spam filters in service of political censorship, but it remains a very powerful tool.

An alternative to email emerges with SMS (Short Messaging System, or text message) marketing. Though comparatively to email, this is costly, the benefits stand to substantially outweigh these costs. People are less accustomed to receiving SMS spam than email spam, having given their cell phone numbers out much less frequently than their email addresses, and tend to view such messages as carrying some priority. While some phones are equipped with SMS spam filters, these are not by any means universal, one is typically made to know a message gas been disregarded as spam, and in any case they are not nearly so stifling as those deployed by GMail or Microsoft.

Platforms are ultimately inescapable, however. As is a degree of content moderation. 

A completely decentralized communications infrastructure is inconceivable, for those who understand the technology, and absent moderation we would be so inundated with pornography and ads for dubious medical products, that the systems would become unusable. Much like there is no substitute for good government, neither does an alternative exist for responsible communications infrastructure, and reputable content curators.

As will be discussed in greater detail below, existing platforms must be prudently navigated to the benefit of building alternatives.


Financial and Economic Barriers

Nothing worth doing gets done without money.

Among the most startling events in the wake of August of 2017, was the mass financial deplatforming of Right wing content producers and activists. The coordinated attacks by criminals, tech companies, mass media, and intelligence agencies, could have been resisted to some degree, but deprived of access to the financial system, those efforts proved futile, and the attacks themselves, fatal. The movement that traveled to Charlottesville, Virginia in that historic summer, is not the movement that is finding its footing today.

Given regulations of the financial industry, designed as they are by the titans thereof for their own benefit, the emergence of viable alternative systems proved impossible.

Even now, though the grip has been loosened enough for platforms like GiveSendGo, Gab Pay, and Align Payments to emerge, these all still rely on the same infrastructure that made possible the 2017 crackdown. Namely the ACH system, MasterCard, and Visa. The next time Nationalist sentiment reaches a level that creates significant discomfort among the financial oligarchs, the same process will ensue and start all over again.

Cryptocurrency adoption, though such a seemingly obvious necessity, has been fatally slow.

This slow pace has been seized upon by the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). Acting in advance of broader adoption, the SEC has designated, with varying degrees of merit, broad swathes of the cryptocurrency sector as securities. In doing so, they claim the right to impose regulations upon exchanges thereof, just as they do with stocks and bonds, which defeats, almost entirely, the purpose of cryptocurrency.

The SEC has filed lawsuits against major cryptocurrency exchanges to include Binance, Coinbase, Bittrex, and others. Seeing this crackdown ensue, major financial institutions have run from the crypto sector. This has resulted in, among other things, the end of the BitPay and Unbanked debit cards, and the cancellation of plans by Strike Payments to launch their own debit card., once a popular platform for purchasing cryptocurrencies with cash and other means, has discontinued service.

While the SEC’s approach is questionable, cryptocurrency enthusiasts always knew some sort of crackdown was inevitable. Had the SEC not taken this novel approach, Congress would have eventually stepped in and created new laws to create a specific regulatory authority. The centralized nature of a cryptocurrency exchanges makes for a pressure point in the economic system where the government and other institutions of power can exert the most force with the least effort.

Decentralized exchanges have emerged, as well as “Atomic Swaps”, but whatever their utility, these only allow the exchange of one cryptocurrency for another. Cryptocurrency ultimately remains a proxy for dollars, and until they are so broadly adopted that one can spend them as easily as they can use a debit card, the need for centralized exchanges with access to the mainstream financial system, will remain the weakest link in the chain.

This problem cannot be solved without territorial sovereignty, and even this is only mitigation.  

The United States Government, or, depending one’s view of things, the Central Bank, will not permit escape from the dollar. Near everyone who tries to do so is destroyed, wherever in the world they happen to reside. They will go so far as to deploy military assets in its defense abroad, and pass out life sentences like club fliers domestically.

The financial system is thus our most substantial obstacle. It must be prudently navigated. Dealings with it must be above reproach. Not only abiding by the letter of the law, but avoiding so much as the appearance of impropriety.

Attempting to work against this system, or even to cheer on foreign actors who do so, is at best futile and at worst disastrous. Among the most dangerous things the Biden administration has done is cut Russia off from the US financial system. Just like we said earlier about the tech platforms, eventually you cut enough people off that you end up being the one isolated. The emerging Sino-Russian alliance is a threat to the United States even more in economic terms than military or diplomatic, but those components will fall right behind the dollar.

While many curse the dollar, with varying degrees of merit, as the source of all evil in the world, it is the standard unit of measure worldwide for economic value. Even in the event that the dollar was replaced by a superior currency, the disruption of the transition alone would result in economic chaos. In the much more likely event of a sudden and disorderly collapse of the dollar due to irresponsible foreign policy, that disruption would be even more substantial. Without very substantial resources at our disposal, we would be at the mercy of more powerful actors in that event, and at present, all the more powerful actors in the United States are decidedly hostile to our interests.

So, for now, our primary means of mitigation is compliance. 

In concert with this compliance, we should seek the most diverse array of means to comply as conceivably possible. This will be expanded upon as we discuss productive industry.

While being shut out of the financial system entirely is mostly limited to foreign entities, it should be expected that individuals and entities under our sway will be cut off from particular institutions over time. Having alternative means of transferring and storing value when that happens is vital to our resilience.

Helping to advance the adoption of cryptocurrency more broadly is a thing that can combine activism and enterprise for a very rewarding experience. For example, forming partnerships with, or establishing our own, cryptocurrency point of sale systems, and marketing those systems to vendors. This writer has seen people profit from this sort of business and it is a thing worth doing. Being able to spend, rather than exchange cryptocurrency vastly improves the economic options of those who use the technology.

Beyond the financial system itself, there exists the challenge of acquiring and allocating resources of any sort. 

Political fundraising in general, and on the Right in particular, has a tendency to rely on benefactors to finance projects charitably. Since those political actors who mean to act with integrity are appropriately averse to dispensing government favors to donors, these contributions are necessarily total loss events for these benefactors.

The Left, and those elements of the Republican Party who aid and abet them, are less averse to this, and consequently tend to do better in this regard. They also have no qualms about subverting campaign finance laws with 501(c) organizations. The Left maintains what could be described as an entire parallel economy to support its activism, though it is so well integrated with the primary economy it is more as though the entire economic system is a tool of activism and subversion. An activist (criminal) who is jailed can expect to be bailed out. A politician who is voted out of office can expect to find a job at a news outlet or think tank. A fired reporter can expect a book deal or a podcast. A donor in business who finds his business struggling can expect a bailout or a lucrative contract with the government.

We would not here advocate all of these things, but they are worth observing.

Dissident Right reliance on charitable benefactors has too many downsides to list here today, and their caustic effects can hardly be overstated.

For one, it puts too much control in the hands of these benefactors. Anybody who can cut off your income can tell you what to do, and defiance of their wishes can leave a project crippled. The absolute easiest way for anyone to ruin a political project, is to pay for it.

It also places too many burdens on the benefactor, as there is no upper limit on what one can spend in pursuit of political and social change, and it is difficult in the extreme to measure success or even the impact of one’s contributions to the successes that can be measured. A benefactor who expects no return on his investment can only do away with that portion of his resources which he can dispose of in such a fashion, and if he goes beyond a certain level in his generosity he depletes his capital stock and can no longer serve as such a benefactor.

If a cause is unpopular, and a benefactor is discovered to have financed it, he risks social and economic consequences that stem from such discovery. Given the nature of our financial system, it borders on impossible to make such contributions without leaving official records which are open to scrutiny by disreputable officialdom, and in the case of prosecutions, lawsuits, or leaks by disreputable officialdom, these discoveries can become publicly known.

Such funding fuels factional hostility as competing groups undermine one another in effort to capture the affections of benefactors. It fosters feelings of hopelessness as resources are depleted with little but temporary excitement to show for them. To the extent these resources finance the lifestyles of the beneficiaries, they are typically only those at the top of the organizational structure, and those lower down the totem pole are left to fend for themselves financially. These influences breed jealousy, contempt, and suspicion within and between organizational hierarchies, which is invariably seized upon by subversive enemy elements and intelligence agencies. nearly every time you’ve heard an activist called a “grifter”, or something to that effect, that was the consequence of this phenomenon.

The most successful and sustained operations in the dissident right have been media operations who have used good business sense to monetize their productions. This is one example of productive industry, which we’ll begin discussing presently. Ideological media operations are not the best example of productive enterprise since they tend to draw resources from within the ideologically motivated base of support, and many who pay these producers do so in much the same capacity as they would any other activist project.

But this writer speaks from experience in saying that there are non charitable means to finance a media operation, and these will figure heavy into our discussion of productive industry, beginning now.


Productive Industry for Sustainable Action

Productive industry, in contrast to charity, hs the potential to make for appropriately more generous contributions since a benefactor expects a return on his investment, and typically gets one. Even if a venture is not ultimately successful, these investments are not total loss events. The enterprise tends to provide some of its revenue back to the investor over time, and uses some portion of those funds to acquire capital assets which can be sold or moved into another investment should the enterprise fail.

People who have money are typically in this position precisely because they do not give money away, and offering investments, in contrast to soliciting donations, opens up a far broader base of potential affluent support. Should that support become publicly known, one who invests in a productive industry that happens to be operated by people with unpopular political views, is a categorically different sort of issue from being a political donor in terms of social consequences.

Productive industry provides incomes to all involved. Not just the management. Hiring like minded individuals to labor on behalf of ideologically motivated enterprises forms bonds of trust and reliance that are absent in mere activist projects. Even in workplaces that are not specifically ideological, employees, shareholders, and managers often form bonds not entirely dissimilar to those of a family, and those bonds can be made much stronger in an enterprise with political motives.

While competition in business is hardly immune to rivalries and hostility, the wider pool of potential resources this creates may tend to reduce internecine conflicts between movement factions and media personalities. While we don’t universally see this easing of competitive tensions emerge in the dissident Right’s primary business function, namely podcasting and streaming media, this is in no small part due to the fact that it is a saturated market with a limited clientele.

A broader base of industrial output means a broader base of potential clients, and greater opportunities for media personalities and movement leaders to cooperate in mutually beneficial ways. Using an overly simplified, and perhaps not the most likely example, just to illustrate our point, say (TRS herein) and Nick Fuentes (America First, or AF herein) both owned shares in the same web hosting company. In that instance, neither is well served by the other getting taken down a peg, so far as that industry is concerned. While they may be in competition for audience attention and its direct benefits, they both have an interest in the other’s capacity to promote the web hosting venture and the more each is able to grow their audience, the more they are able to increase the revenue stream they have in common.

It is worth noting here that this writer knows little about securities regulations, but does know enough to say that to buy or sell shares in a company is to trade in securities. This will have to involve the assistance of accountants and likely attorneys.

Navigating this section

Organizing this part of the document presents some challenges for the writer.

Below we will discuss several specific revenue models, sometimes going into specific services, and products, and their production. It is here acknowledged that this will not appear universally interesting, at first glance. The specific revenue models, however, are more illustrative of concepts than the specific proposals themselves.

Key Concepts

Low Entry Barriers & Scalability 

Most of the specific business idea discussed below have little or no startup cost. More than this, they allow entrepreneurs to scale up incrementally with demand. This is not always the most cost effective way to do a thing, but it can create opportunity where none would otherwise exist.

To court investors, it helps to have a proof of concept. It helps to have capable people already carrying out a task.

We give one example of web hosting, in which the business does not have to begin with even providing web hosting services. They can be an affiliate or a reseller. If they can prove a capacity to sell web hosting, then making capital investments in the resources a web hosting company requires is a means by which to increase the profitability of an existing business, which is a decidedly less risky venture than throwing money at a mere idea.

Geographic Independence

While later stages of the project will involve stationary industries, such as larger manufacturing operations, we begin as nimble as possible. The idea here is to create income opportunities for motivated individuals with similar purposes that have no geographic tether. They can move as they must to accomplish higher aims.

Most of the specific business ideas laid out involve entirely Internet based businesses. Others involve equipment that can be easily moved.

This is not intended to be a permanent state of affairs, but to provide the economic means to acquire land and move activists to that land for the political capture of a municipal government.

Vertical Integration

The idea in some part is to integrate vertical supply chains. This is a process where a company acquires or starts up productive enterprises that serve one another up and down the supply chain, so as to reduce their dependence on outside parties.  Notably, I use the examples of web hosting, online media, e-commerce, set top boxes, printing of merchandise, and advertising, with an eye toward financial services in the future. I begin with this largely because it is the supply chain I am most familiar with, and because it provides geographically untethered potential to employ people who are supposed to relocate as part of a political mission.

This may come across as self serving at times if the reader is unfamiliar with my motives, but the specific supply chain I am discussing is almost irrelevant. The economic goal is ultimately to vertically integrate multiple supply chains, so as to make us more powerful in service to the political project. When you control your entire supply chain, it is difficult to bully you. Vendors cannot refuse you service if you own them. Not only does it make content producers more difficult to deplatform, though this obviously figures heavy into my thinking given my experience, but also helps to prevent us from being pressured in other ways such as to fire employees or assent to popular but destructive political themes. Moreover, vertical integration creates cost efficiencies and synergistic effects cross the various stages of production, resulting in greater profitability and more rapid expansion.

If you’ve heard the term “vertical monopoly” before, this is the process that creates one, but I have no illusions about accomplishing such a thing. There’s no realistic prospect of us becoming a monopoly web host or media company. We can however make ourselves more difficult to put pressure on, and this serves vital political interests.

The term vertical integration was Coined by Andrew Carnegie to describe how he and his company, U.S. Steel, had taken control of all of the aspects of that company’s supply chain. If you don’t know, Carnegie and US Steel are one of the most iconic American corporations to ever exist, and wielded no shortage of political power throughout this country’s history.

You can read more about vertical integration at Investopedia, here.

Strategic Placement Within Supply Chains

If you read that piece at Investopedia, one of the things they say is that vertical integration occurs when a company acquires two or more phases of a supply chain.

Well, if one is in Web Hosting and Advertising, they are occupying two phases of many supply chains. We shall go into greater detail in that section, but our vision for the advertising business is not merely to sell clicks on blogs. The idea is to position ourselves as an affiliate marketing hub. It puts us as the middle man between many advertisers and many publishers, and it may go without saying, that we do not ban our publishers over whining activists.

Once you are in web hosting, who will build the websites?

Once you are in advertising, who will produce the ads?

Programmers, video editors, photographers, graphic designers, what other industries can they plug us into?

If you have web developers and ad producers, salesmen will come in handy.

Salesmen are very persuasive, they might make good electoral candidates.

And on, and on we go. At no point do we reach a point of satisfaction and stop. We work as a cohesive and ethnocentric group to get footholds into multiple different sectors of the economy and use them for political purposes.

Business as Propaganda

You see it all the time. “Woke Corporations” using their market power to push degenerate political filth.

There’s no reason we can’t use the same tactics for more noble purposes.

The “diversity training” of a company run by ethnonationalists would surely be of a more useful nature than that which currently causes so many employees to contemplate taking a sick day.

The media operations portion of this are too obvious to need explaining, but we may briefly here note that the businesses described below offer other such opportunities.

In the section on advertising, most notably, we ask “When was the last time you saw an entirely white family in a TV commercial”

The writer literally cannot remember.

Such industries are strategically important for political purposes, and beyond what we actually outline in this document, we aim to expand into such ventures in perpetuity.

Our Unique Relationship to Labor

While the aim of any company that sells its shares has to be to provide value to those shareholders, we can expect at least the early investors to be ideologically motivated, and in those businesses where not much capital investment is required up front we don’t actually have any particular requirement to be profitable at all. Imminently we will describe the first revenue stream as a paywall content creators’ network, and if that company prefers to continue making acquisitions instead of paying its shareholders, speaking as the creator of the network, the writer is just fine with that.

The political portion of the project involves getting people who are currently dispersed across a vast territory into one municipality to create a voting bloc to capture that municipal government. For this purpose, it is perfectly fine if a company with $2,000 of startup capital does nothing more than feed and shelter one individual.

Contrary to primarily profit driven enterprises, whose aim is always to reduce labor costs, our aim is to increase our sustainable labor demand as quickly as possible. We are using market principles to accomplish political goals. For more on this see SurrealPolitiks S01E006 РMisesian Socialism And Radical Agenda S06E009 РEconomemetics


Spreading too thin?

In the writer’s experience, it is a common error to start too many projects such that this causes many of them to fail or progress too slowly. One may get that sense as one proposal after another opens up all manner of cans of worms in the following paragraphs.

Firstly, it is important to remember that these projects need not all be launched at once.

Secondly, the whole entire point is to hire as many people as possible. We certainly won’t begin with the revenue to pay respectable salaries for entire teams to manage each project, but as we’ll demonstrate, that isn’t necessary right away.

Many of these projects utilize overlapping skillsets, and specifically skillsets pertinent to the media operations. Web Hosting and Software as a Service and E-Commerce, most notably, use nearly the same technical repertoire. It is not expected that an upstart Software as a Service (SaaS) venture will immediately have such a large client load that it will warrant a large team of people. Instead, we have a team of people who are useful to the media ventures, also managing a large set of projects which begin largely dormant. As those projects grow their user base and revenues, we bring on more people, and move them to the territory as part of the political project.

Since the fundamental purpose here is to provide jobs to activists, venturing into multiple enterprises simultaneously or in rapid sequence, so long as we do not incur obligations we cannot fulfill, provides the optimal situation to increase our labor demand. It also provides the most diverse revenue streams, which will come in handy when some of these ventures fail, which is to be expected.

For many of the SaaS projects, we can avoid incurring obligations by not billing customers. We can just run ads on them. If and when the services begin to grow their user bases, then we can worry about getting into contractual obligations with paying clients.


In the Beginning, There Was Media

As mentioned, the primary non-charitable business model in the dissident Right space has been media production, though this straddles the line between productive industry and charitably financed activist project. The successful media projects have weathered very substantial challenges, and stayed in production while various activist organizations have disbanded or faded from view. They have gained tremendously valuable experience from weathering these challenges.

Since these form the existing industrial base of the movement, and not without consequence, the fact that this writer is most familiar with this project category, this paper will begin with media operations and we will outline a plan to expand from those ventures into other industries. The writer here acknowledges the potential for this to appear self serving, but there is ultimately nothing preventing non-media economic actors from running with elements of what will here be described. Such economic actors need only pick out the bits most useful to them, and apply their talents and resources accordingly.

Moreover, the primary idea behind this paper is to begin with businesses that are largely Internet based in order to facilitate political migration. Media businesses already occupy this space and many of the skills acquired and lessons learned during those operations are applicable in other industries. Notably web hosting, advertising, e-commerce, shipping, and software as a service applications.

With diverse revenue streams of this nature, the geographic location of employees is of minimal concern to the enterprise. Individuals located on different sides of the continent, or even the planet, can work together near as easily as if they shared a row of cubicles. This makes for a much wider net when talent scouting, and when the revenue streams reach a level sufficient to facilitate relocation, these employees can pick up and go where they are needed without worrying about finding work.

That relocation process is central to the political aims of the project. 

Media Revenue Models

Other than to note their substantial contribution to the revenue base of media producers, we’ll skip for the most part any discussion of live stream tipping. While this revenue source could be described as a form of advertising, since it is designed to purchase the attention of the host, and usually involves having a message read on air, the “name your price” element common to this revenue stream renders it too close to charity to warrant much discussion of productive industry.

Most payment processors do not permit charitable contributions to be processed unless the entity using the service is a registered 501(c) or political organization. Exceptions to this rule once included Stripe, Square, and PayPal, but they have deplatformed most Right wing media personalities more colorful than Glenn Beck. Those still available require different paperwork to be filed, and most media operations act as state registered Limited Liability Companies, or DBAs of the individual personalities. This is prohibitive of charitable use of most payment processors.

Paywall subscriptions are another story.

This is the revenue stream which as made TRS a powerhouse, and formed the most reliable revenue streams for this writer. Content subscriptions with recurring payments are a common business model deployed by everyone from Apple to Netflix, and payment processors do not blink at companies who report this as their primary revenue model. These recurring revenues provide a reasonably predictable income stream for content producers, typically with an upward trajectory over time, and most often provide meaningful value to customers in return.

The primary weakness of the paywall model in an ideologically driven media operation, is the tension between a desire to disseminate information for propaganda purposes, and the requirement that paying customers get exclusive access to something worth paying for. An interesting study in overcoming this challenge can be found with White Rabbit Radio, in which Tim Murdock airs his live broadcasts publicly, then puts the replays behind a subscription paywall for a period of time. After an appropriate period of exclusive subscriber access, he then makes that replay public once again.

Another weakness of the paywall model in terms of both its political and economic impact is its inherently competitive nature. The most common pricepoint appears to be in the $10/month range, and subscribers who lack infinite resources are compelled to choose which content producers to support with this allocation. The content producers themselves are conscious of their competitors, and collaboration has the potential to be stifled by the realization that promoting one’s competitor can have economic consequences.

Additionally, few producers can on their own create enough original material to warrant such a payment. This tends to shut individual operators out of this market, at least in terms of a self sustaining revenue stream. TRS has overcome this hurdle by creating a team of talented producers who routinely release both paid and public content. The product has been of sufficient quality that even in the absence of credit card processing, the operation remains economically viable.

But this has not been without some political consequence for TRS either. They used to have a much broader base of producers, but at one point cut a large number of them off in the months following the Unite the Right Rally. Over time, others have come and gone, and these producers have in some instances held grudges.

This writer is not familiar with all that transpired between the former and existing TRS production teams, but one presumes they involved differences of opinion that impacted branding in some way. Such concerns have formed this writer’s aversion to such collaborations in the past, informed in no small part by several unpaid syndication relationships once attempted and no longer continued.

It might almost go without saying that such operations have been subjected to financial deplatforming, because while payment processors have no problem with the content subscription model, they do respond to complaints from activists about content on those subscriptions. The ways in which branding concerns can impact payment processing and other revenue models, necessarily informs such partnerships.

Acknowledging once again the potential for this to come across as self serving, this writer has been working on a project to overcome a number of these weaknesses.

The vision is a content creator network that maintains a common user database with a common access control system, but across otherwise mostly independent sites. Through this, a subscription to one paywall is a subscription to all paywalls within the network. This provides greater value to the customer than the single site paywall model commonly in use, while maintaining separation of branding for content producers who may not wish to share the same page as one another. This distinction of branding also has the effect of creating a degree of separation between the site processing the payments and the sites hosting the content. Avoiding the potential for reputational harm to the payment processor makes the system more durable, and this durability has the effect of reducing pressure to part ways among producers.

Whatever the separation of branding, in any business there always exists the potential for participants to have disagreements which are serious enough to cause a parting of ways. If you have to part ways with somebody you are doing business with, there always exists the potential for trouble. This is hardly unique to media or politics, but it has unique effects in this market.

Media producers have a habit of speaking their minds, that’s sort of the whole point of the enterprise. When conflicts emerge between content producers, there is a tendency to see this emerge in the content itself. When those disagreements are political in nature, this is all the more to be expected. These become factional conflicts within the movement and are detrimental to trust and cohesion among participants, and this negatively impacts a lot more than the bottom line of the businesses involved.

Creating this wall of separation without entirely severing the cooperative aspect has the effect of allowing producers to part ways without severing the business relationship in its entirety. Avoiding that severance reduces the impulse to destroy the rival producer, and thus provides for greater potential to mend fences down the road.

Accounting for and distributing revenue among participants is handled through creative use of an affiliate marketing program. Rather than “processing payments for” each producer, which has unclear implications on a number of levels, the producers earn referral commissions on paywall service sales they direct to the paywall service provider. Participating producers direct audience members to the paywall service website either through a special affiliate link or with a promo code which credits them for the sale. According to a contractual agreement, the producer will get a share of the recurring revenues for the duration of that customer’s subscription.

This is advantageous on a number of levels, not the least of which is that payment processors are not known to have such strong opinions about how one advertises their business, as they are about what the business is selling. The service does not outwardly market itself as providing access to each individual producer, but to a loosely affiliated network of member sites. The producer is a client of the service, and earns money by referring sales. This makes the system much more durable than alternative arrangements.

Merchandise and E-Commerce

Merchandise sales have proven a valuable resource for media producers, and the skills acquired in the process are broadly applicable. These include, but are not limited to website security, familiarity with e-commerce software, shipping, product acquisition, and inventory management to name just a few.

In short, if it can be bought, sold, and shipped, it can be a part of the project, and media producers who have experience with merchandise sales can lend expertise to every part of that project.

This easily ties in with the content network. The subscription service site, or a member site, could easily handle merch sales for any other producer on the network who didn’t want to deal with it himself. Revenue shares could be worked out either on a per product basis or using the same affiliate program software referenced in the paywall discussion.


Most of the e-commerce business is fairly straightforward, and does not require as in depth an explanation as we went into for subscriptions, but we may here briefly note that among the most successful product sales for media producers are screen printed goods like t-shirts and hoodies and hats. Also popular are sublimation printed products such as coffee mugs and products with like surfaces on which messages or logos may be applied. Same for stickers.

While few media producers are printing their own gear, this writer did a good deal of research on the subject a few years back, and even acquired a sublimation printing kit and heat press shortly before the federal government threw a wrench in the works. The most basic equipment to begin this type of business can be purchased for very little up front cost.

A quick search on Amazon and eBay returns the following

So, for less than $1300 + consumables, a printing business can get underway. Perhaps more importantly, this is not the type of work that requires highly specialized training or even an extraordinary intellect. Anyone who can be trained to handle machinery can be trained to handle this equipment. This is an instant job for somebody who is not a tech wizard or a media personality. In reasonably short order, it could be many jobs.

To be sure, this is a business model that requires somebody to be near the equipment. Just as certain, there are ultimately more cost effective means of producing stickers and t-shirts and mugs than purchasing the cheapest stuff I could find online in a quick search sorted by price.¬†But the equipment listed above, in addition to being cheap, is also portable. You wouldn’t want to be trucking it back and forth with you every day, of course, but it can be thrown in an SUV and the business can be moved in a day.

This investment would be a drop in the bucket for the content network once in full swing, and a total no brainer as the print shop could provide printing services to content creators within the network. Perhaps there could even be an exclusivity agreement, depending on how contracts were negotiated.¬†A venture such as this one could be launched well in advance of the political migration, and it could join that migration on a day’s notice. Once sales reached a certain level, which wouldn’t necessarily take too long, buying equipment two or three times the cost would not be a huge risk for an investor.


Set top boxes to defeat censorship

Also, while we’re on the subject of marketable products, let’s address a censorship problem.

A Raspberry Pi Zero W is capable of streaming 1080p HD video over the internet.

A kit with case and power adapter also costs $60 retail on They can be purchased cheaper wholesale, perhaps obviously.

If you don’t know, the Raspberry Pi is a tiny computer that runs a Linux based operating system. They can be configured to boot to a media player or a web page or basically anything you want if you have the technical talent. The Zero W is basically the lowest end version, but if it is capable of streaming 1080p video, it will suit our purposes just fine. The current top notch version is the Pi 4, and that kit can be purchased for $159 on Amazon. That one is capable of playing Retro gaming emulators up to an including the Nintendo 64.

Having those set top boxes for sale will keep us connected to our audiences no matter what other platforms do to us, as long as we can find web hosting. This has not historically been an insurmountable challenge with the notable exception of the Daily Stormer.

Advertising  РAs Much More Than Podcast Revenue

Prior to the Unite the Right Rally, I used to bring in a substantial portion of my income from advertising. Amazon alone used to pay me hundreds, sometimes thousands of dollars a month. I wasn’t the only one.

The mass deplatforming that ensued after that saw the alt right almost completely shut out of mainstream advertising opportunities

This might have made for a more enjoyable listener experience, but it also made monetization much more difficult for content producers, which placed a heavier burden on listeners in the process to support the content they liked.

But, actually, this is hardly the most pronounced problem with the advertising industry.

When was the last time you saw an advertisement with an entirely White family?

I literally cannot remember. 

This might be the only thing more J’d up than porn,which it also more closely resembles by the day.

Internet Advertising Basics

When it comes to Internet advertising, you basically have four models, CPM, CPC, CPA, and CPS.

  • CPM stands for “Cost Per Thousand”. The “M” in CPM represents the word “mille,” which is Latin for “thousands”. This refers to a pay per impression model where the advertiser pays based on how many times his advertisement is seen. This is the model of Gab Ads.
  • CPC stands for “Cost Per Click” in which the advertiser pays for traffic to his website. This is the model of Google AdSense.
  • CPA stands for “Cost Per Action”. This could be something like a retweet, comment, email newsletter signup, or a software download that typically does not involve an exchange of funds. This is the Twitter model.
  • CPS stands for “Cost Per Sale”, otherwise known as affiliate marketing. This typically involves paying the publisher a percentage, or a flat finders fee, for each sale they refer to the advertiser. For publishers, the best programs offer recurring payments for subscription services, especially if combined with multi level marketing. This is how the Amazon Associates program works.

There is nothing preventing us from venturing into every single one of these markets, but for now I will speak of affiliate marketing because it is the one I am most familiar with and I happen to have acquired some specialized software for this purpose, and the acquisition of this software is an interesting story in its own right. Which we’ll get to soon.

The Marketing Marketplace

There are several affiliate advertising marketplaces which most publishers will recognize by name. LinkShare, Commission Junction, Impact, and ShareASale, to name just a few. Some of these platforms have deplatformed our guys.

The basic function of these services is for advertisers and publishers to meet and agree to terms. Typically, the advertiser makes an offer publicly, and the publishers browse these offers. The publisher clicks to apply to the programs that are of interest to him, and advertiser makes a yes or no decision, or makes the publisher a custom offer.

This entire process is automated. I have never had to communicate with a human being in all my years of doing it, with the notable exception of emailing some individuals when I was rejected from their programs and manually asked to be reconsidered, with varying degrees of success.

In E-commerce, almost all of the sites you buy from online use one of a handful of applications to process sales. Many of these applications have affiliate programs either built into them or available as addons. In my case, I do all my business with something called WooCommerce, and I have an application called AffiliateWP which serves as the Affiliate plugin.

These affiliate features and plugins operate according to certain standards so they can be incorporated into the markets I’ve listed above. When a customer buys a product or service through an affiliate link, the commission is registered with the affiliate market, and the advertiser pays the marketplace, and the marketplace pays the publisher.

Last week I purchased an application to facilitate such a business. It is designed to integrate with popular shopping carts, register sales, accept payments from advertisers, and issue payments to publishers. All automatically.

The software can handle recurring payments, so, say for example we wanted to have other people advertise the content network. Any publisher who sent the content network a subscriber would get a percentage of the monthly revenues for that customer for the duration of that customer’s subscription.

It also handles one of the most powerful marketing concepts ever invented: Multi Level Marketing.

Multi level marketing involves getting other people to still more people to push your ads through incentives.

For example

  • You send me a sale directly, you get 10%
  • Someone who came to me through, who sends me a sale, he gets 10%
    • You get 5%
  • Someone who came to me through¬† that guy sends me a sale, that guy gets 10%
    • Your first referral gets 5%
    • You get 3%
  • Next level, he gets 10%
    • Your second level referral gets 5%
    • Your first level referral gets 3%
    • You get 1%

You can make this as many levels deep as you want. Especially when this is done with recurring subscription payments, those of you who are mathematically inclined can see where this is going, there’s a very strong incentive to push the program.

Our First Clients

Several years ago I made a very wise investment.

For the AffiliateWP application just mentioned, the license normally costs $300 per year for one site or $600 per year for up to 10 sites.

I had at one point purchased such a yearly license planning to use it for, which was the retail site I set up when I realized I could no longer get payment processing for Radical Agenda. One day, long before that license expired, I got an email from the developers of the applicaiton. I guess they were trying to raise some quick cash, and they were offering a lifetime unlimited site license with free updates for life, for a few hundred bucks, I don’t actually recall what the amount was off the top of my head. But I knew it was a good deal and that a lifetime unlimited site license meant it wouldn’t go to waste.

Well, here we find ourselves.

The only questions remaining are: What do you want to sell and how much of it can you acquire?

Sub Affiliates

I have literally hundreds, maybe thousands, of affiliate marketing relationships. I do not bother to use almost any of them. I sign up in case I want to use them at some point.

Some of these programs offer what is known as “Sub Affiliates” which is to say that I can set up their programs on my affiliate network and allow others to run ads on my behalf. I cut them in on my revenues.

This is useful in a number of ways, besides the obvious fact that we get paid.

For one, it populates the affiliate marketplace to make it look more popular than it really is. When people come and they see no activity, they don’t want to sign up. By populating the system with hundreds of advertisements, it looks like it is a busy system even if it is not.¬† Some of these relationships are with major brands. When people see major brands, they think it is a quality service.

This has synergistic effects with the content network, because we have publishers all ready to sign up as well.

I haven’t talked about the free blogging platform I set up at, but I’ll briefly insert that the whole point of that system is to run advertisements, and thus serves this purpose.


AI and Software as a Service (SaaS)

If you’ve been keeping up with the writer, you’ve heard much about artificial intelligence recently. Getting up to speed on this has been a time consuming challenge with substantial expense, and it tends to move faster than one man can acquire the information, but the progress has been substantial and the technology¬† itself can begin to aid the learner at some point in the progression. The potential is so vast that we will not here attempt to give it a thorough explanation in this already lengthy article, but we can say a couple of brief things.

The writer uses a popular image generation service to produce most of the show art for Radical Agenda and SurrealPolitiks. There is a substantial monthly fee for that service.

The same software as that service uses, is installed on the computer composing this document. The process of “training” AI is complicated and the images generated locally are not of the quality one gets from the paid service. But, with the right investments, it can be much better than that service.

The service in question, importantly, has a bunch of PC nonsense built into it, which have been discussed elsewhere. Words like “Nazi” are outright banned, it loves the Democrat Party so much it won’t let you insult a donkey, it will not produce anything that could be deemed violent or hateful, and if you try to subvert the moderation policies it will ban you. This is in desperate need of a replacement, and much work is being done to produce this.

You’ve all heard about ChatGPT I’m sure. ChatGPT can do a lot more than chat. It can write entire articles for blogs and basically anything that can be done with language. The writer has a paid account with OpenAI, the makers of ChatGPT, and uses their API (Application Programming Interface) with a variety of different software applications to produce text for various purposes.

While OpenAI’s technology is very advanced, they have some pretty substantial limitations built into the system. One can only get it to write articles about 500 words in length, as one example. They also have the same PC nonsense built into it as the image generator and this renders it worse than useless for politics, other than to mock the thing.

ChatGPT is an AI technology using what is known as “Large Language Models” or LLMs. I have an LLM running on this same computer and the writer has gotten it to break with the PC nonsense already. The conversations I had with it actually got kind of scary to the point I asked it “Are you a cop?”

It said no, but cops tend to do that.

I still am faced with length limitations, but that is a solvable problem. I actually signed up for yet another paid service on the web that has done that, and done so on the cheap.

In any case, to make these systems publicly available requires a substantial investment in hardware on top of the time and talent to make them work, but the potential borders on limitless. And since most people are scared to do the bold things this technology is capable of, it presents a very serious opportunity for us.

More on that in the future.

SaaS More Broadly

These web based systems can be broadly categorized as “Software as a Service” or SaaS. The idea here is that people are paying to use your program online. If you’re my age you’re old enough to remember when online wasn’t really a thing. You went to the computer store and you bought a floppy disk and the disk had value. Most programs didn’t have much in the way of copy protection and you could pass out copies to your friends.

That was cutting into sales of the applications, so then there was copy protection and very clever people went about subverting that.

More and more, everything is moving into the so called “cloud” which is just a fancy way of saying “someone else’s computer”. I am not at all happy about that, because I do not like other people having my data. But that’s not really the point I mean to make here. This emerges largely as a means to make sure software developers actually get paid. You can’t copy the program, you have to go online and use their system.

You getting paid on a regular schedule for people to use a computer program is not to say that there is no work involved. This is not free money. But, the entire purpose of the enterprise is to automate as much of that work as possible. For what work there is to do, our vertical integrations go a long way in creating synergistic effects and cutting costs.

Notably, though we haven’t spoken much about web hosting, I am already doing all of the work a web host does because I manage my own servers for my media operations. I have to do this because I can’t trust third party providers due to prior deplatforming issues. In the course of doing this, I have acquired more web hosting resources than my media operations require, and I can easily host other applications on these systems.

The AI stuff requires special hardware, but there are plenty of systems that do not, and I recently stumbled upon a really interesting resource which you might know something about if you receive my newsletters.

I get emails from a service called Envato Market, and this place is basically a clearinghouse for intellectual property licensing to include music and images and video and WordPress themes, but also entire standalone applications for web servers and smartphones. There’s just too much potential here for me to even consider going over it in any detail, but I’ll show you a quick bullet list of source code available for purchase along with the current prices to illustrate my point.

Source code, if you don’t know, is the programming language of all your programs on your PC or apps on your phone. Web applications are usually written in PHP and they run as source code, while your smartphone and Windows apps are compiled and sent to you in what are known as binaries. The details of this are sort of beyond the scope of what I mean to get at here. All you need to know right now is that you can edit source code and change the functions of a program in ways you cannot change the apps you tend to use on a daily basis.

This is where I purchased the Affiliate Marketplace application, and they have tons of stuff that is basically ready to go. You just have to install and configure it, and there are varying levels of difficulty to this depending on the software.

While plenty of options exist, it may best illustrate my point by showing you what are essentially clones of popular systems. Many of which our guys have been banned from.

There are hundreds of these things.

Then there’s the smartphone apps.

And on, and on and on…

We can buy all of these right now for $1,818 total. Leave out the crypo exchange and you’re talking under $1,000. If one of them works, we make our money back many times over. If not, we wasted under $1900.

There’s time involved, and some of that time has to be contributed by trained professionals. But if the project had popular movement support, there are certainly such individuals within the movement.¬†Also, there is always the option of contracting developers from sites like Upwork, and, as an aside, we should probably create a competitor for Upwork too.

Building parallel economic infrastructure like this serves a broader purpose than paying activists and making money.

Most notably, these companies are largely hostile to our interests. They are near certainly Democrat campaign donors, they kick us off their systems, and they incorporate Leftist anti-White themes into their advertisements, as just a few examples of how this hostility emerges. Competing with them doesn’t just derive revenue for us, it deprives the causes they support of resources, makes us more difficult to discriminate against, and at some point empowers us to discriminate, and to propagate our own political messaging through advertising.


Web Hosting

We’ll make this comparatively brief. All of the stuff I’ve talked about here requires web hosting services. As part of our vertical integration and deplatforming avoidance strategy, we are going to make sure that we control as much of that supply chain as possible.

One of the greatest things about the web hosting business is that you can get into it incrementally. At each level, you get a larger cut of a larger sale.

On the most basic level, you don’t have to do anything but refer sales as an affiliate.

Then there are what is known as shared hosting reseller programs. In some the service is entirely provided by somebody else but you sell it on your website. Others you deal with the customer service angle, and they handle all the technology.

There are what is known as VPSs or Virtual Private Servers, and you can either run your own shared hosting services on VPS of your own, or you can resell the VPS services of others.

Then you have the option of renting a dedicated server, on which you can configure your own shared or VPS hosting.

Then you have the option of colocation, where you put your own hardware in someone else’s datacenter.

Then you buy the datacenter.

Then you start running wires across the country, and try to put Verizon out of business.


At all levels of this you have options as to the level of support you provide. For a high monthly fee you can offer “fully managed” services. On a lower scale, you can offer “bare metal” which is basically just plugging in the thing and letting the customer deal with it remotely. This too, can be scaled up or down over time according to human resource availability.

So you can start with basically nothing, and no up front cost, and you work your way up until you become Verizon.

It’s a competitive business. Most people fail and quit. A smaller but significant number make a few extra bucks. A still smaller number manage to eke out a modest living. Some get rich. Verizon has a few competitors.

It’s entirely up to you.

We have some very specialized skills at our disposal. I won’t without his permission volunteer the services of “my web guy” but suffice it to say, I have one. He is a genuine expert in his field.

Although I myself used to be the operations manager of a datacenter, and currently manage many of my own services, this comes in handy for me, because there occasionally arises a need where something is beyond my grasp. When this happens, I reach out to him, he helps me fix it, and if that problem arises again, I don’t require his help. Through such a process, one becomes an expert himself.

That is the nature of the web hosting business. It is mostly very mundane stuff you can train a chimp to do. Nearly everything is automated, and every once in awhile you need somebody to push a button, but you need one genius around to fix things when they go haywire.

This is great for a project such as ours, because it allows us to hire people of mid range intelligence as long as we have a genius around to help them when the need arises.

Over the years that I have been running my media operation, I have met the most unique sort of challenges. Hack attempts, DDOS attacks, service interruptions, intelligence agencies, and colossal fuckups of my own not least of all. I’ve met all of these challenges with a constant eye on reducing costs, and with the help of this friend, my websites have never been offline for very long. Not even while I was in prison. Over the years I have collected hundreds of credit card numbers, and thousands of names and email addresses, and none of them have ever fallen into the wrong hands, despite the best efforts of extremely ruthless and capable people.

These are valuable lessons I will be very happy to impart on our people.

The briefest of notes on marketing our own services

So, I’ve gone and listed all these potential revenue models, and if you are at all business minded you’re sitting there saying to yourself “OK, so you have a computer program. How are you going to get anybody to use it?”

This is fairly straightforward. We buy ads. A couple grand to Gab, a couple grand to Twitter, a couple grand to Facebook, a couple grand to Google, you buy some airtime on local radio stations, as just off the cuff examples. There are countless creative means by which to purchase exposure.

One thing not in dispute is that advertising will get people to your website. What people do when they get to your website, that depends on you.

I haven’t spoken much about email marketing here, but I maintain mailing lists on all of the many websites I operate, and this is very important. You get a website visitor, you get his email address, you email him until he unsubscribes.

You run an ad for some retail product you’re selling. You get an email address. You email him about your affiliate network. You email him about web hosting. You email him about podcasts.

He goes to one of those websites, he give them his email address, he’s getting more emails.

You have an affiliate network paying other people a cut of sales to run the ads on their site. They get paid when other publishers run the ads so they recruit other publishers.

All drive sales, all collect emails, all the emails offer the multi level affiliate marketing benefits. Anybody can sell anything they want from entertainment to webhosting and they can collect multilevel recurring revenues for doing so, and on down the line it goes.

This collects revenues, revenues buy ads, ads drive sales and collect emails, make revenue buy ads repeat.

You see how this works? It’s a cohesive strategy. Fully integrated.

All of these ventures are connected in various ways. They can cross promote, share resources, etc…


Conclusion on Industry

It is not lost on the writer that there’s arguably too much information above. Rest assured I have my motives for doing this aside from competitive carpal tunnel. If you’re still reading, congrats, things get more interesting momentarily.

One thing that has always set my teeth on edge about the Alt Right is its tendency toward what I will describe as not quite Marxist, but Marx-esque, critiques of economics and certain institutions of power. Understandably disgusted with society structured such as it is, there is a tendency toward wanting to see elements of society, as such, torn down. Since nothing tears down institutions quite like Marxism, one can see how elements of this might become incorporated into various types of social movements, including ours.

This emerges in a tremendous variety of ways, ranging from hating police, to abandoning elections,¬† with all of the dark and often violent implications these necessarily carry. Perhaps the most destructive of these pathologies is a rejection of economics, often styled as an aversion toward what they call “capitalism”.

It must here be stated, lest the writer be accused of libertarianism, that there is plenty to critique about economic policies and behaviors. Not everything done in pursuit of money is virtuous, and this is so obvious it borders on silly to mention it. But critique is all that ever follows from this, and we have seen what happens when a people try to form a culture around critique. It is a purely destructive, or one might say, deconstructive, phenomenon.

The very term “capitalism” has an interesting history, the depths of which will be beyond the scope of today’s text. An interesting summary can be found here. In conservative circles, there is a popular myth that Karl Marx coined the term. I call it a myth because it is not entirely accurate, but to say it in this way does not actually mislead the recipient of the message. What you hear about capitalism today is mere Marxist criticism of economics as such. It is not about a choice between various modes of production on a menu available to policy makers. It is about a rejection of the science of economics, and assigning a pejorative term thereto, for the purposes of slander and subversion.

If the science of economics is just another “ism” then we can simply do away with it like any other “ism”. Just like Leftists have tried to do with “racism” and “sexism” which is to say, an effort to make people ignorant as to the realities of race and sex. Attacks on “capitalism” serves the same purpose in economics as attacks on “racism” and “sexism” do in the propagation and genetic integrity of our species. They do this for similar and nefarious purposes.

Markets are not evil. Money is not evil. Trade is not evil.

People, sometimes, are evil.

There is no substitute for good people. You cannot organize your economy for good if your people are garbage, it’s really quite that simple.

If you have a socialist economy and terrible people then you will have a terrible economy. If you have a capitalist economy and terrible people you will have a terrible economy. If you have some bastardized mishmash of an economy where the rich get to socialize their losses and privatize their gains, that’s prima facie evidence that you’re dealing with bad people, and it has not a damn thing to do with markets or capitalism. It’s just bad people doing bad things, and the way you fix that problem isn’t by nationalising industry nor by slashing regulations. It’s by getting rid of the bad people.

Or at least, separating yourself from them, which we begin, now.


Political Migration

I moved to New Hampshire in 2014 as part of something called the Free State Project. This began as a reasonably good idea, but fell prey to Robert Conquest’s second law of politics.

Any organization not explicitly right-wing sooner or later becomes left-wing.

The idea behind the FSP was to geographically concentrate libertarians who would would make the maximum possible effort toward building what they envisioned as a free society. This appealed to me tremendously because I came from New York and I was not very happy there. I had come to believe this was because the government was interfering with my life too much, and there was some evidence to support this theory.

When I came across libertarianism it was really the first time I had thought about politics in any greater depth than what I was being fed by Fox News. Whatever the flaws of libertarianism, I can credit it with snapping me out of that particular haze. That was certainly a thing worth doing.

And unlike a lot of the things you hear from libertarians these days, the Free State Project was pretty well thought out. The didn’t choose New Hampshire out of the blue. This was a substantial deliberative process. They had an eye toward secession, and they understood that to have national sovereignty, or at least, to break free of the United States Federal Government, they were going to need a few things.

You can’t secede from the Union if you’re landlocked, most notably. New Hampshire has a small sea coast and that has important trade and military implications.

New Hampshire also has fresh water, which you might have gathered is pretty important.

One doubts they said this out loud, but I imagine it wasn’t lost on the people planning this that the people where were almost entirely White back then. This is changing rapidly as the federal government and Massachusetts turn Manchester into a dumping ground for felons and junkies. But we’re still a lot better off in this regard than most of the country.

We used to have an entire section of our criminal law titled “Subversive Activities”. The Free Staters got that repealed thinking it would promote freedom. I think they miscalculated.

The politics have been changing here, and not for the better. Tolerance for drug addicts and scumbags is not freedom.

But our legislature is among the most accessible institutions ever devised. I used to post videos, I called them “Anarcho Lobbyist” where I’d basically go to legislative committees and rail against every conceived increase in State authority. I might start going back soon, I’ll surely have to call it something else because the content will be changing substantially.

If you’re not a felon, you can walk right into the State House, and sit down in the legislative committee, while open carrying, and tell them whatever you want.

I’m not sure if anybody¬† has endeavored to tell them about the Culture of Critique, but I might give it a shot someday. Or maybe you will.

The natives got fed up with the antics of the Free Staters, as did a lot of the free staters themselves.

Part of the reason I worry about the Alt Right drifting into Left wing economic ideas is because I see them making so many of the mistakes the libertarians did. I’m no longer totally averse to the government intervening in the economy, but I know that if you don’t create an economic environment where people have to struggle, they won’t struggle, and if they don’t struggle, they don’t thrive. You can’t just treat Darwin like that and expect a positive outcome.

The libertarians did basically the opposite, or at least, they did it in the reverse order. They decided they weren’t just averse to the government messing with people’s personal lives, they decided to positively embrace degeneracy. They didn’t just want to leave the gays alone, they wanted to elect transgender people to the legislature. One of whom was recently arrested for child porn.

Robert Conquest was a very smart man.

Cross him at your peril.

The possible plan I’m about to describe here isn’t that new. I’ve had to change a few things because the market has changed, and that’s unfortunate.

If you search Zillow for houses in New Hampshire, and you sort that list by dumber of bedrooms descending, Berlin used to have a whole bunch of these 9 bedroom houses for sale dirt cheap, like under a hundred grand. And I thought this would be amazing for a right wing political migration. In addition to bringing our own people here, we could recruit from disaffected libertarians. There’s lots of White people here who don’t like what they see happening to demographics. They certainly don’t want their kids to be propagandized with gender nonsense at school. They hate the drug epidemic, and they realize that loosening drug enforcement has made matters worse.

Those houses in Berlin have all been sold. Their values have since increased substantially. It’s a shame we didn’t do this in 2016 when I started looking at it. You used to be able to get a 9BR house for under $100k, now the most bedrooms I could find under $200k was a¬†7BR on a 3,920 sqft lot in Berlin for $198,500.

Next one is a 6BR on a 2,178 sqft lot in Berlin $175,000. Not nearly as good.

There used to be tremendous wide open plots of land available for like a grand an acre. Not anymore. I looked into it, best I could find was 2.55 Acres in Berlin  for $39,999. After that is just 1.07 Acres in Berlin for $34,900.

If we look at all New Hampshire listings by lot size, under $1,000,000 we find a 4BR House on 332 Acres in Monroe, NH for a million flat.

But we can get a much better price per acre if we forgo the house. There’s 312 Acres in Freedom, NH for $684,000 .That’s $2,192 per acre. Wouldn’t it be cool if we all lived in Freedom, New Hampshire?

There’s 206.5 Acres in Alstead, NH for $379,000. That is $1,835 per acre. I’d say this is getting interesting.

And, for reference, 1 acre is 43,560 square feet. So, let’s do a little math.

206.5 acres times 43,650 sqft is 8,995,140 sqft on that 206.5 acre lot.

Our 7BR house in Berlin was on a 3,920 sqft lot.

So if we imagine that all the land on that lot can be turned into houses, and I understand that’s not necessarily the case but this is just back of the napkin stuff, 8,995,140 sqft lot, divided by 3,920 per lot is 2,294 lots. If we built 7BR houses on each of those lots, that’s 16,058 bedrooms. There’s nothing saying we can’t build a high rise to the best of my knowledge, and if there is we can repeal it once we take over, but let’s just say for the sake of argument that not everybody wants a 7BR house and some people want a larger piece of land and perhaps most notably we don’t have the resources right away to build 2300 homes. Let’s really sell ourselves short and say we aim to build a thousand two bedroom homes. Still a pretty big investment on top of our $379k for the lot.

I don’t know much about building houses I bet a dozen or so people listening to this podcast do. So, there’s some more jobs right there. My credit is shot but I know some of you are better situated in this regard.

The population of Alstead was 1,864 at the 2020 census. We could capture the municipal government very easily with just the people who watch SurrealPolitiks on Rumble if we give them jobs and a place to live. You guys who watch on Odysee, we’ll find space for you, I’m sure.

Alstead is in Cheshire County, and the population of the County of the 2020 census, was 76,458.

In the 2020 Election, not that I believe it was real, here was the vote breakdown

Republican 17,898 or 40.34% – Democrat 25,522 57.52%. That’s a spread of 7,624 votes. If we put 37 voters per acre on our 206 acre lot, we can swing this county Red without changing any opinions of the natives. That might be a stretch, but that’s the math. It was closer in 2016. Clinton beat Trump in Cheshire County by 5,188 votes. That’s 25 voters per acre on our lot. But statewide in 2016, Clinton only won by 2,736 votes. We could do that with podcast downloads to spare.

It might go without saying that if we control the government we control the Republican Party in that city.

Keene is also in Cheshire County, that’s where I used to live. You know who was the Chair of the Keene Republican Party last I checked? My old friend Ian Freeman. He’s probably about to spend the rest of his life in prison, so I don’t think he still holds the position, but for those of you who keep saying that the Republican Party is some kind of sealed box that no man can enter without a trip to Israel, you’re definitely wrong. It’s not a serious dispute.

If the people in our community are active, and we control a municipal government, and the GOP in the county is currently out of power without us, but we can help them take over the County, then we can take over the County Party. Controlling the party in a vast and populated section of the State, and having proven ourselves capable of altering the political landscape, we will be a powerful force within the GOP on the State level.

Should we take control of the state legislature, and the governor’s office, these are the institutions which would compose, and sign into law, a declaration of independence.

Then things really get interesting, but we would dare not commit such a thing to writing, so prematurely.

Immediate Next Steps

What to do next is a question fraught with variables such that it defies a definitive answer here, but we may outline some broad strokes for those eager to make something like this come to fruition.

Feel Free to Contact the Writer

I am notoriously easy to get a hold of. I do a live public call in radio show twice a week, and you are similarly welcome to use this contact form.

    Please prove you are human by selecting the car.


    Talk Amongst Yourselves

    The above is not a thing one man can do. What the writer has attempted to do here is to demonstrate largely by logical proofs that there is hope for our salvation that does not involve a collapse of our civilization, and that warrants meaningful effort on the part of those motivated to fight for what is good and decent in the world. It is hoped this has been achieved.

    The success of that effort depends largely on you, and the people you discuss this project with subsequently. Absent action on the part of the reader, it would be optimistic to hope this text would be read by three thousand people. It is unlikely that so much as 1% of them will do anything about what they have read, and of those 1% a still smaller number will prove capable of bringing meaningful progress to the effort. At that point you are taking about a few dozen people trying to save mankind, and this would be a sorry state of affairs for mankind.

    What will be the deciding factor in the success of this text will be whether or not this proposal gains traction in the minds of those who read it, and whether that traction can cause others to read it or put forth proposals of a similar nature. If this concept gains such broader traction, then the variables will quickly exceed the predictive powers of this writer, but one can predict there will be plenty of action and excitement in that event.

    The nature of ideas tends to be that they are disseminated by thought leaders. The writer fancies himself one, but his power in this regard is rather limited. If you take these concepts to discuss with others, and these ideas filters up to more powerful thought leaders, then they will filter back down into the broader movement consciousness, and this would provide the energies required of something so ambitious.

    Intentionally Targeted Propagation 

    It is a popular myth that so much happens in a fashion fairly described as “organic”. The big things happen when men organize and scheme. This includes the spreading of ideas.

    In the writer’s observation, the prevailing idea today amongst Nationalists is that the two party political system of the United States is so walled off and corrupt that a breakdown of civil order is necessary, inevitable, and above all, desirable, in that it will provide the opportunity for a new vanguard to seize the public consciousness and make radical changes to our political system.

    The writer is skeptical of this idea, and encourages the reader to join him in this skepticism. Skepticism is the appropriate term, and though much abused, provides the proper motivation for Step 2.

    In the regular discourse, particularly online, but increasingly in person, Nationalists nurse these post apocalyptic fantasies. There is little done to dissuade them of these ideas, and the results are predictable. The reader is now equipped to discuss an alternative to collapse and civil war, and with this alternative at the ready, he may subject these fantasies to appropriate scrutiny. Under that scrutiny, such delusions will not persist.

    When thought leaders meet this scrutiny, the ideas they disseminate will be altered by it. The reader can hasten this by intelligently directing this scrutiny in discourse.

    Collaborate with others who find this proposal compelling.

    Target audience members of thought leaders who propagate contrary proposals.

    Cause the proposal to filter up to the thought leaders through their existing audiences.

    Bask in the glory of a job well done.

    Intentionally Targeted Recruitment

    This effort requires more than ambition and popular support. It requires resources and talent. It specifically requires trained professionals in a number of fields, such as;

    • Programming
    • Systems Administration
    • Accounting
    • Law
    • Sales
    • Marketing
    • Investment and Finance

    Nationalists would do well to descend upon communications channels of various sorts where these types congregate, and, armed with persuasive skills, discreetly target individuals for recruitment into the effort.

    If you red pill a programmer, or a lawyer, you have done a very great service for your Race & Nation.

    If you are a programmer, a lawyer, or professional in one of these other fields, your efforts toward the project will be much appreciated, but your efforts in recruiting your colleagues may prove even more valuable.

    Organized Deliberation

    The Free State Project did not choose New Hampshire by one man’s decision. Jason Sorens founded the effort in 2001 after publishing an article in The Libertarian Enterprise seeking interested individuals to contact him. The idea caught on, and a deliberative effort began shortly after. Detailed and prudent research was done, more specific proposals were made, and a group took a vote at which New Hampshire was chosen in the year 2003.

    The nature of this project is such that it would require a great deal of consensus among a group not known for its capacity to agree on much. The libertarians faced similar challenges. They made fatal errors in an effort to overcome those challenges, and identifying and avoiding those errors will be the subject of future writing.

    Finding a broad agreement on the idea of financing a political migration through entrepreneurial effort can provide the basis for such deliberations. Once that basis is established, the deliberations should begin.

    Territorial Research

    As previously stated, New Hampshire was chosen for this proposal largely due to the writer’s familiarity. There could be better options. Even if there are not better options, this can only be determined for certain by seeking them out.

    Considering the criteria here described, and contemplating other criteria, it will be necessary to research alternative territorial propositions. To understand the natural resources, demographics, unique political circumstances, economics, and other factors in choosing a territory.

    Functional Proofs of Business Concepts

    Outside of media enterprises, there exists not much in the way notoriously successful dissident Right business ventures. That can and should change soon. You have some say in this.

    Take an assessment of your capacities. Do you have the training to start a business that might serve this effort? Are you young enough to begin such training? Do you have access to resources that might finance such an effort? Do you know people who you might approach who have such capacities?

    Act on this assessment.

    A few successful businesses operating under the principles here described – geographic independence, ease of entry, scalability, vertical integration, and provision of politically motivated employment – will allow those so employed to devote more effort to our cause, and provide evidence to others of the proposal’s viability.

    The Writer’s Self Serving Request

    Though I have tried with limited success to making this about me, there are those who will read this and wonder what they can do to help the mind that produced it.

    To them I say, FYPM. Which is Radical Agenda slang for, finance this work charitably.

    There is information on how to do that at the bottom of this post, and at



    Create, White man

    I recently had occasion to talk about a man by the name of Matthew Hale.

    I met Hale at the United States Penitentiary in Marion, Illinois. I was serving a 41 month sentence for extortionate interstate communications. He, a 40 year sentence for soliciting the murder of a federal judge. Both of us were wrongly convicted, and given sentences far beyond the pale even if the accusations were true.

    We were both held in something known as the Communications Management Unit, or CMU, where we were prevented from speaking to the media and had our other correspondence severely curtailed and closely monitored. Hale currently has a lawsuit pending against the BOP for preventing him from publishing his book.

    It should be obvious from this that the people who hold your interests in contempt, view our speech as uniquely dangerous to their designs.

    Hale was the leader of something known as the World Church of the Creator. I never joined, but I found one thing Mr. Hale told me about the name to be a very savvy observation.

    There is no God in the World Church of the Creator. You, are the Creator, White man.

    Look around once in awhile, and that becomes difficult to deny.

    You deigned that your God had commanded you to control nature, and you obeyed.

    You mastered wood, and stone, and bronze, and iron.

    You built castles, tamed horses, and conquered the land.

    You built ships, and conquered the waves.

    You built weapons, and armies, and conquered the savages.

    And though your enemies today describe this as is a rampage of wanton destruction, there are wheels, highways, and hospitals in Africa, which offer no small dispute of this.

    You built this world, and if it falls apart, that is your fault.

    You are guiltless in its creation.

    You are credited with this.

    You are not a destructive force, but a creative one.

    If you have committed any crime against history, it is that you have believed the destructive lies of your enemies, and abdicated the responsibilities your ancestors incurred with their creations.

    Your creations are not self perpetuating works of God.

    They are the works of your hands, and your mind, and to the extent it may be said that God acts on Earth,

    He does so, through you.


    Now go forth, and build something historic, Creator.


    Find out more about Matthew Hale at




    If you would like to help finance this high quality production, I try to make this easy enough to do….


    Follow me elsewhere, listen, watch, and keep in touch…

    Be sure and get subscribed to my newsletter if you haven’t already, and whitelist [email protected] and [email protected] so I don’t end up in your spam trap!


    Leave a Reply

    Skip to toolbar