All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 17, 2019 - Radio Free Nortwest - H.A. Covington
19:43
20191017_rfn
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Oh, then tell me, Sean O 'Farrell, tell me why you hurry so.
Hush, O 'Farrell, hush and listen, and his cheeks were all aglow.
I bear orders from the captain, get you ready quick and soon, for the bikes must be together by the rising of the moon, by the rising of the moon.
By the rising of the moon For the pikes must be together By the rising of the moon Oh, then tell me, Sean O'Farrell Where the gathering is to be In the old spot by the river Rightful known to you and me One word more for signal Token whistle of the marching tune For your pike upon your shoulder By the rising of the moon By the rising of the moon by the
rising of the moon.
Greetings from the Northwest homeland, comrades.
The date is Thursday, October 17, 2019.
I'm Andy Donner, and you're listening to Radio Free Northwest.
Radio Free Northwest
Today's Radio Free Northwest episode will be abbreviated since it is a special program wherein I respond to the feedback garnered from our previous show.
Admittedly, that was a troll attempt on the part of Comrade Jason, and I wholeheartedly endorse it.
Now, what I don't endorse is feedback given to us prior to the show having been consumed.
Okay, some of that was going to happen based on the title of the program, but it was avoidable.
I want to make it clear from the outset that I believe everyone who sent us any remarks, positive, negative, neutral, whatever, meant well and, in their perhaps own special way, had the white race's best interest at heart.
Even so, there's quite a bit of it there that needs handled, and, well, I'll just hop into it.
First things first.
I need to make it clear that at no point did we actually indicate in a serious way, for those of you who didn't actually listen to the whole program, that RFN was going away.
It most definitely is not.
In fact, I said so in the beginning, and Jason reaffirmed that towards the end.
I won't go so far as to say I'm disappointed in the people who reacted as if that's precisely what we said, because, in all honesty, I must admit that we were baiting you just a little bit.
Even so, if only for your own sake, try to do a little bit better in the future.
And speaking of doing better, I do want to clarify further what our actual meaning was.
Again, yes, money was involved, and yes, our consternation at not getting the Northwest migrants or the donations we think we ought to, okay, that was in there.
But as I said, there was a deeper meaning here, and that deeper meaning is time, resources, and how we make use of them.
Radio Free Northwest, in its own turn, needs to take a backseat for a little bit to long-term projects which have proven to be a serious issue.
Perhaps the most difficult thing that needs to be said is this.
For better or for worse, this is a flat fact.
Those of you who are not participating and supporting us in a material way and know that does not just mean money simply cannot be allowed to dictate the way we use our time since, again, despite the best intentions and despite whatever interest level you think you have, we are the ones that answered the call and others aren't.
No, I take no joy in speaking to you this way, but it must be said, because, quite frankly, there seems to be a misunderstanding about who we're accountable to, especially because, at this point, only one or two people are paying our way, and that isn't absolutely essential, though, as indicated, we do appreciate those of you who are helping out in that manner.
Perhaps the most upsetting type of response we got, not just to the show I'm discussing, but to everything we here at the Northwest Front do, is the blatantly off-topic, vague, or otherwise mysterious reply.
Again, I understand people frequently don't mean things this way, but when you look at things from our perspective, patterns emerge, and they're not good.
This phenomenon has always fascinated me personally, and Harold noticed it too and remarked on it a couple of times.
What happens is this.
Every opinion we're sent has a particular slant.
Those opinions, whether they be individual or en masse, as has happened in years prior, Are almost always matched one for one with the opposite opinion in the same set of feedback.
And that's just plain weird.
It's actually happened this time, and I don't want the people involved to think I'm calling them out, but I have to name specific replies only to juxtapose them.
One email I was sent shortly after the previous episode aired contained the proposition that maybe the party's needs just haven't been understood correctly since Harold's death.
Um...
What?
Again, I don't mean to sound as if I'm dogging someone, but the party's needs haven't changed because the party's situation hasn't changed and the party's goal hasn't changed.
I'm not entirely sure how to interpret that other than to refer back to my previous comments about unnecessarily vague feedback, allowing those people providing the feedback to miss the point.
Perhaps the first item of follow-up comes in the form of an RFN comment stating, Well, again, that's borderline off-topic.
I could interpret that positively as someone trying to explain to us why this thing isn't happening, but I have to take umbrage at that idea needing an explanation.
We've explained to you why things aren't happening, and we've explained to you what you need to do about it.
And again, even if I choose to take a positive interpretation of that, other items of follow-up have indicated that Harold, in theory, was that personality.
I'm not arrogant enough myself to claim to be that great personality, but again, let's posit that Harold was.
Okay, so what gives?
But even more importantly, let's assume that there have been no great personalities involved in white nationalism whatsoever for many decades.
I still don't think this feedback is apropos, and I actually disagree with it.
You see, again, presuming this is correct feedback, just generally, that we must have a great personality somewhere, that great personality would need someone and something to work with.
Even if we don't have that great personality and they won't emerge for another ten years – god, I hope not, but let's assume that's the case – the rest of us need to be in position and ready to react, as much as I hate saying that we should be ready to react, since I'm proposing we take the initiative.
Okay, I think I've made my point, but this off-topic reply is very much a case of dodging the actual issue, that even if said off-topic reply is technically correct, again, so what?
Alright, I don't want to belabor that point, so let's move on.
The next thing I need to talk about is expectations.
I almost covered expectations and what people should and shouldn't expect of the party on previous broadcasts, particularly on our last program where we let the cat out of the bag.
I'm so glad I waited, because somebody actually brought the subject up for me in a way that allows me to respond in the most appropriate manner.
In my opinion, the subject of expectations goes hand-in-hand with proving our credibility, and in every way but the most important, this is an eminently reasonable response to the material we put out.
I need to remind you all of something very important, though.
Familiarize yourself with the history of white nationalism, and you'll realize, as Jason said last episode, and I'll note this was during his serious portion, we've pulled off something that has never been pulled off before.
And it wasn't just following Harold's death, either.
Prior to the Northwest Imperative, there has not been a viable option for halting white genocide on the North American continent, and prior to Harold Covington formalizing it in the form of the Northwest Front, nobody had taken any action towards this.
Prior to all of the current HQ group, as well as many migrants all over the homeland, no one had repeated his act of coming home.
Now, prior to the Northwest Front, again, there have been all sorts of false starts and screw-ups and all manner of things that happened in white nationalism, but nobody ever successfully transferred power from one person to another without there being a major legal battle, an outright failure, or other hanky-panky that I don't need to get into right now.
To be as specific as possible, the issue of broken promises was raised.
Well, what promises were broken?
Harold himself made it clear we can't guarantee anything, and we can't look into a crystal ball and give you a flat answer.
A lot of what we have to do must be played by ear, and that's especially true right now.
Can you specifically say something that we said we would do that hasn't happened?
To be perfectly blunt, the people doing things are the ones that did what we told them to do, and the people who truly understand what we're talking about are the ones that sacrificed of themselves to put themselves in a position to be useful to the party.
And yes, people have done that.
People will continue to do it.
One huge reason we released the program that we did last time we were on the air was this.
We have to be ready for the next batch of people that we know are coming.
There are things we have put off that, again, we haven't announced what we're going to do, but there are things we've put off that cannot be put off any longer, and RFN is what's going to be sacrificed to that, at least on occasion.
Slightly more broadly, though, now that I've been specific, I would like to ask this question.
Lately, multiple remarks over the last few months have been directed towards the party asking about, well, prove you're going to do this, or prove that, or guarantee us this, so on and so forth.
And, again, what specifically did we not do that you think we should have that we said we were going to?
Quite frankly, we have gone through many periods where we have felt the need to justify the claims we're making, and we're all justified out.
We have more than proven what someone familiar with white nationalist history, and that's kind of a sticking point, would need to prove.
Precisely what were we supposed to do that we didn't?
Okay, I've asked that question enough, but I want to focus on it for a bit in perhaps a more useful form.
Expectations are what expectations are for a particular reason.
Is there something you think we should do that we have not?
And more importantly, is there a reason you think we should do that?
And now I'm moving on to my most broad criticism of the entire issue of why isn't the Northwest Front doing something?
Well, again, the answer is we are, but we're not going to broadcast that.
We're not a racist version of the local Rotary Club, and we're not a bunch of white nationalist socialites that are going to put on a dog-and-pony show for you.
Now, if you think I'm being overly critical of this question, I'm not, and here's why.
Throughout the years, we've been asked many variations of this question, usually phrased, why aren't you doing more?
Given our purpose, we're not going to be a traditional white nationalist whatever you want to call it.
In fact, we're going to be very, very different because we have an actual purpose to begin with.
I have decided I'm going to go so far as to accuse people asking us this question in a non-ironic way of having a 1984-style memory repeater and wiper built into their heads.
The alt-right and the absolute disaster that was should be all the proof you need that you don't want us to try to replicate white nationalist history.
The why aren't you doing more crowd thinks we're going to have big meetings and get on TV and have rallies and deliver lectures in public spaces and so on and so forth and, well, a whole bunch of things, because there are a broad manner of expectations.
And again, this is, as I said, eminently reasonable, except that it doesn't apply to us.
The things we need to do have nothing to do with being a traditional political organization, and that, for some reason, always gets lost in the shuffle.
My response to this exact issue is not whimsical and it's not intended to dodge the question.
This is actually a very direct answer.
The reason I give these direct answers the way I do is that I must combat the deliberate and willful refusal to understand, even when it masks itself as otherwise well-meaning and well-intentioned feedback.
It was very recently told to us point-blank that the Northwest Front must actually be in front.
Using serious political criteria gauged on the basis of whether or not we're trying to accomplish a result, we always have been.
Prior to the advent of the alt-right, and I've said this several times, but prior to that, the Northwest Front had actually assumed primacy in the movement, which is why everybody was dogging it and not dogging anything else, because they understood everything else lacked substance.
Well, once again, because we were essentially the only entity in white nationalism opposed to Trump in a serious way, Well, we have primacy again, and we have to act like we have primacy again.
And having said that, I'll move on to my final bit of feedback that I want to talk about.
What I'm about to do now is respond to what I consider the biggest dodge of them all.
And this is a human nature issue.
I'm not trying to call out a specific individual.
I want to reinforce that observation first and foremost, because this is another of the objections that is technically eminently reasonable, except it's wrong.
Here's what I mean.
I'm responding to a, well, not really lengthy email we were sent, and again, I'm responding to this one because it's an actual criticism that was well-formatted and well-stated.
I don't agree, but I want to make it clear I actually take this seriously, just like I took the previous question seriously and answered it seriously.
Just to drive this home, I have an immense amount of respect for the man writing this because he opens it with the observation that he's theorycrafting.
And theorycraft he does, but very well, actually.
And it's not entirely theorycraft to give him his due because he actually has some experience to back this up, even though he's technically off-topic because he's responding to something none of us said.
Comrade, I'm sorry to do that to you, but again, I'm taking this seriously because you intended it seriously.
Before I get going, I want to make it clear that I'm pairing this with the previous criticism because the email I've received indicates that this man thinks we've done a good job proving ourselves.
So that goes right back to the issue of completely opposite feedback coming in at exactly the same time that cancels itself out and leaves us in a position where we have to, well, do whatever we want, which is a bit of an issue, but that's for another time.
Now, as I said, this email is significant.
The author's experience is significant.
His thought process is significant.
The conclusions he draws and the reasons he gives are significant.
Like I said, I don't agree, though.
What specifically is said is that we should pull episode 507 because it's demoralizing, and to quote him precisely, if the first message received is, woe is our checking account, then our momentum is lost.
Okay, you'd be right, except that that's not something we said.
And before I address that, more generally I'd like to address the idea of whether or not this was demoralizing.
I don't think it was, and it should not be interpreted that way.
The reason I say this is off-topic is that Harold, and later I and several others, have been criticized wrongly as being depressing or demotivating or a whole host of other things, generally negative rather than positive.
I've responded to that in the past the same way I'm going to respond to this.
Whether or not something is demoralizing or negative or upbeat and positive is largely a matter of what you choose to hear in a particular message.
There are quite a few times, prior to my own homecoming, that I would send Harold an email telling him to ignore people that criticize him for being negative because he's actually giving someone a solution to their problems and encouraging them to employ that solution.
How you could criticize that as being negative in any light, even though the situation itself may be very difficult, I don't understand.
To make it perfectly clear what was said on last week's program, I'll recap.
Those familiar with the history of white nationalism and the subject of how to actually bring our new nation into existence understand and accept that the Northwest Front has more than proven it should receive a particular type of response to our radio-free Northwest material.
That response is far more than monetary.
Since we're not getting that type of response, we're going to defer our Northwest Front production to things that are more long-term and more important so that we are prepared for the next batch of migrants we know is coming.
How's that demotivating?
If anything, to the previous complainant's point, we're taking the next step.
We are going first, we're just not going to broadcast a play-by-play for you because we're not the thrice-damned alt-right and we know better.
That has, believe it or not, always been the essence of Radio Free Northwest, Harold using his time, talents, and resources to encourage you to involve yourselves in the single viable plan to halt white genocide, and, well, largely getting the same sort of response we got to our bit last week.
That is the issue here.
All of these things are subconscious diversions away from what actually needs to happen, though to the email fellow, I will note that he's a bit of an exception to that, though I'm not going to say why on the air.
Again, comrade, don't think I'm trying to be unfair to you.
I'd also like to note that this was not a spur-of-the-moment decision.
This is something that the entire HQ group had been discussing and contemplating for quite some time.
The announcement was not made spur-of-the-moment, and nor was it hastily thrown together.
Rather, it was, as Jason hinted, very carefully crafted.
Quite frankly, I'm standing by what we did.
We got this right, and the idea that we need to pull it is absolutely wrong.
Let's take a step back and consider a much older item or three or ten from previous days on Radio Free Northwest.
Harold received exactly this sort of criticism on a regular basis, and every single one of us, I hope, would be incredibly upset with him in hindsight if he had pulled episodes people didn't like because the material therein was challenging.
No, again, we got this one right, and we're sticking with it.
Having said everything I intend to, I will wrap this program up shortly.
The fact of the matter is, though, that no, the party's needs are not misunderstood, and no, we don't need to prove that we're going first because we have in spades if you were paying attention, and no, this wasn't to motivate me.
With all due respect to those opinions, the fact of the matter is that we're moving forward, and we made it plain that we were moving forward, and we made it plain what the consequences of that would be.
What you heard us do on Radio Free Northwest last week is...
Tangibly and materially in line with everything else Radio Free Northwest has said and aired and expressed.
It is no longer our responsibility to keep telling you that, rather, it is our responsibility to take the next step.
And most importantly of all, it is everyone else's responsibility to do what the rest of us did so many years ago and come home so that you can participate in what we're doing.
Our race depends on it.
Radio Free Northwest is brought to you by the Northwest Front.
P.O. Box 2188, Bremerton, Washington, 98310.
You can visit the party on our website at www.northwestfront.org.
Until next time, comrades, hail Victory!
▲
Export Selection