There is way too much debate in this sphere. This seems weir | Imperium Press

There is way too much debate in this sphere.

This seems weird to say. Shouldn't we be constantly testing ideas? Well, yes of course. Aren't most of us here because we got "redpilled"—because we dared to think the unthinkable? Sure. We should always be willing to revise our ideas, always be open to challenge, always be refining and learning and growing.

But here's the thing: I'm a practical man. I run a business. Not just any business, but a dissident business. And in our day-to-day operations, we have challenges that no other business has, challenges that aren't even challenges at all for normal businesses—when they need X done, they just go out and pay someone to do it. This is not how it works when you're surrounded on all sides by people who want to shut you down. You have to worry about opsec, you have to worry about protecting customer data, you have to worry about deplatforming, you have to worry about hostile actors. All this adds up to where probably 80% of your day is spent on doing completely unproductive tasks dealing with these things, and not on, say, publishing books. When Imperium Press needs X done, I don't just go out and pay someone; I go through a long process of vetting and security—and after all that, we still pay.

I look across the broader dissident sphere and I see a lot of talent. I see a lot of people with skills, energy, low time-preference, drive, creativity, and fanatical devotion to our cause, to our nations, to our people. And what is most of this talent being spent on?

Debate.

We talk a lot about building parallel infrastructure, parallel institutions. Near as I can tell, the infrastructural backbone of the nationalist right (at least in the Anglosphere) consists mostly of reading groups and debate forums. That's great, but we've got enough guys who are good at having opinions. We need web designers, accountants, organizers, men who will start businesses doing unsexy work, but getting paid for it and taking pride knowing they're the foundation holding up a whole superstructure. Without that foundation, it doesn't matter whether the problem is the WEF or localized bad actors in government. We'll never be able to displace them. Every revolutionary force stood on the strength of a whole series of support networks. Debate clubs had very little to do with it.

Theory is nothing without action; what's more, action almost always precedes theory. I'll leave you with a quote, and I won't tell you who said it, because as good debaters and philosophers, all that matters to us is the truth:

Old establishments are tried by their effects. If the people are happy, united, wealthy, and powerful, we presume the rest. We conclude that to be good from whence good is derived. In old establishments various correctives have been found for their aberrations from theory. Indeed, they are the results of various necessities and expediencies. They are not often constructed after any theory; theories are rather drawn from them. In them we often see the end best obtained where the means seem not perfectly reconcilable to what we may fancy was the original scheme. The means taught by experience may be better suited to political ends than those contrived in the original project. They again react upon the primitive constitution, and sometimes improve the design itself, from which they seem to have departed.