SolarGeneral Proudly Presents...
...by James Mason
Previous Chapter | Index | Next Chapter
I've said in the past that the enemy was indeed anyone who attacked, for whatever reason, and that it was vitally necessary to know what amounted to an attack, in order to be able to ascertain one's real enemies. You don't wait until the bullet has left the muzzle. And in the huge spectrum of human struggle and endeavor, the fates of nations and individuals as often as not are decided upon matters far less dramatic and clear-cut than the use of firepower. More often, these days, it is intrigue and guile which decide the course of the future. To be undone by a bastard who has not declared himself your foe, or who has actually painted himself as a "friend", is one of the worst fates imaginable. If just that much can be avoided in a person's life, or in the life of the Movement, then we will be halfway home to victory.
But to know what an attack is, to be able to identify an enemy, is not enough as anyone with strong beliefs and values worth fighting for will have already found out. You can depend upon an endless stream of those who'll seek to cross you up. But can you always depend upon yourself to be perfectly ready and willing to deal with all comers? Today's friend, tomorrow's enemy. In revolutionary politics your potential worst enemy is always your closest associate. Not only does he know you but he also knows "where all the bodies are buried". Are you ready to deal in a summary fashion with the problem once you have received enough early signals that someone close is about to, or already has begun to turn on you? Can you be certain? Can you act?
How about close blood relatives? Can you at one stroke "cut them loose" in the way the Manson Family "cut loose" their families in favor of their greater, REAL Family under Manson himself? If the answer is no then you are prime sucker material and I wouldn't give you two cents for your chances.
This is not going off half-cocked. It IS going around with a hare-trigger. Years ago, in a publication pre-dating SIEGE, I printed an appeal– a PLEA– to members of the Movement not to engage in games or trickery against my circle at that time because we would have absolutely no choice whatsoever other than to consider such behavior as an attack and take appropriate steps– even more aggressive and belligerent counter-measures– of our own. I cited Movement harmony and unity as cause for my appeal. Predictably, it fell on deaf ears. Francis Parker Yockey1 had said that to attack someone who is not a real enemy is to ultimately attack yourself. Those in the latter part of the 1970's who chose to attack us for no reason other than to try to eliminate competition in their imaginary "power struggle" are no longer in the forefront of Movement affairs as they were at the time.
I do thank my lucky stars for the ability I've always seemed to possess for picking up on little hints that trouble is on the way from certain quarters, in advance of its actually breaking the surface. If it is an instinct, it is only a knack for detail. It has never betrayed me. It saved me a number of times where otherwise I would definitely have been lost. It has but one drawback: once convinced of an impending attack, or at the very least, of perfidy that cannot go unchallenged or unpunished, but without any overt action on the part of your enemy so as to be noticed by outsiders, strident and vigorous counter-measures give the appearance of unprovoked aggression. Sympathy is thereby lost and certain condemnation is incurred. In practically every case I've been involved in, I've had to stoically assume the role of the bad guy in the issue. This is fine with me. If you haven't already learned the actual worth of "sympathy", or of having been "dead right" in an issue, then I fear for you. To have never been a sucker, to have kept on winning, at whatever cost, will always be worth it to me.
The tiniest, most insignificant of details have tipped entire schemes of personal aggrandizement that would have been at the cost of the Movement. A certain inflection placed on a single word in a talk; the inexplicable disappearance of an item no bigger than a thumbnail; equations which just don't add up; things which most people would write off without a second thought, have time and again tipped the balance. When an attack is planned and as it becomes more imminent, the element of surprise takes on greater and greater importance. Naturally, many times things will appear "fine and dandy" as long as the plotters feel that this appearance is to their advantage. This again makes it doubly difficult to try and warn others, or to try and justify yourself to others whom are not involved in the intrigue, as no one wants to believe such things and no one wants to disrupt what has the look of a perfectly normal and peaceful state. During 1978, in a trans-continental telephone conversation with one highly respected Movement leader, I laid out the scanty evidence as I had it and submitted my conclusions based thereon- treachery was underway and an attack could be expected at any moment. His response, aside from utter incredulity, was that I was "turning on my last friend". The reverse was the case as the individual on the phone was forced to admit within the week.
Earlier in SIEGE I referred to the thing which Hitler told his troops as they prepared to go crashing into Poland to avenge a thousand wrongs accumulated over the previous twenty years. He said at that time, "Close your hearts to pity." As though these troops would need to be reminded, you might think. At least as often as not, these situations come up suddenly (as their plotters intend). The instant the facts are clear to you, you must abandon all hesitation, all remorse. You must immediately determine that no quarter can be expected and that none shall be given. You have to determine to do whatever is necessary in order to win. And it matters not against whom, once they have demonstrated that it is conflict they want. Comrade, friend, family member... it doesn't matter. The first few go-rounds you experience– assuming you survive– you'll have to keep reminding yourself of this. After that it becomes instinctive.
None of this is to be confused with the phenomenon I describe as the "Instant Bastard Sydrorne"– where this or that person is a "queer" or a "Jew" or an "agent" simply because they disagree with you. This type of Right Wing behavior does the Movement a grave disservice not only because it muddies the water and actually HELPS the real agents, but because it has the effect of cheapening real enmities. Mere name-calling and coming-to-grips-with, or matching wits against a determined enemy are two distinctly different things. The syndrome I outlined had one other feature: it is generally transient.
I was once accused of threatening Movement unity because I "refused to be parted from my revenge". So it may have appeared to the accuser. It is rather that I view planned attack at any time or planned disruption inside the Movement to be among the most serious kinds of crimes. They don't blow away. The passage of time has no bearing upon their status. If an end cannot be put to such an issue right away, and if merely foiling a plot or stabilizing a situation is all that can be done for the moment, then the conclusion has no choice other than to rest "on hold" until such time as it can be settled permanently. In the meantime, others will rise up in their order and demand solution in turn. Such is the cycle of life's struggle. It is not expected by me that anyone will "learn" anything by it.
[Vol. XIII, #1 – Jan., 1934]
1Yockey, who served on the staff of The War Crimes Tribunal after WWII, wrote the lengthy metapolitical work Imperiurn, a Splenglerian interpretation of Western history. He died mysteriously in 1960.
Previous Chapter | Index | Next Chapter
Brought to you exclusively by SolarGeneral.com