PDA

View Full Version : Quality vs Quantity in Political Movements



Prussian
Friday, January 14th, 2005, 02:21 AM
...the question of quality vs quanity, what is the preferred or more so required means to further the starting basis of a politcal group/party/movement/agenda in the context of the overall sense of ongoing support, a realistic agenda & genuine progression?

Personally I stand firm in the belief that quality is a major factor in not only this but any endeavour & should be pursued consistently & without delay thus avoiding the stagnation of a purpose, the means of creating quality is what remains.

It is an obvious truth there are always plenty of idiots to join the bandwagon but how do we go about the baby steps to building a quality organisation without falling victim to degradation within the ranks?

nordic_canadian_male
Friday, January 14th, 2005, 08:19 AM
...the question of quality vs quanity, what is the preferred or more so required means to further the starting basis of a politcal group/party/movement/agenda in the context of the overall sense of ongoing support, a realistic agenda & genuine progression?

Personally I stand firm in the belief that quality is a major factor in not only this but any endeavour & should be pursued consistently & without delay thus avoiding the stagnation of a purpose, the means of creating quality is what remains.

It is an obvious truth there are always plenty of idiots to join the bandwagon but how do we go about the baby steps to building a quality organisation without falling victim to degradation within the ranks?


Before you expand you must have a very solid foundation. Sure you'll have more members if you choose to neglect quality but that will be short lived.

The best organizations are those where there's a personal bond between the individuals. Perhaps they grew up together, or maybe they're connected by blood. What's important is loyalty, something lacking in most people these days, especially anyone who reaches the top(the good ones never do).

Their must always be a clear leader, someone who can guide all the others. A strong leader is also important because it stops in-fighting and leadership struggles. All other members must know their role and perform it accordingly,no slacking off as to not create 'bad feelings'.

In the end hopefully the people who run the party are competent, dedicated and loyal, then let all the idiots join the bandwagon.

Prussian
Friday, January 14th, 2005, 11:29 AM
Before you expand you must have a very solid foundation. Sure you'll have more members if you choose to neglect quality but that will be short lived.Indeed quite often enough people get together & try to expand as quickly as possible thus the concerntration upon building a quality base becomes overly lacking to say the least in favour of numbers, first rule is the group/party in question must go about forming a cohesive bond along side an agreeable & workable program at the very least, in this situation the means to stimulate this quality building environment is simply best protected by holding off expansion in numbers(at least in the large scale)until bonds are formed, an agreed direction is being taken & teething problems are being sorted out during the process of the group's infancy.

nordic_canadian_male
Friday, January 14th, 2005, 10:13 PM
Indeed quite often enough people get together & try to expand as quickly as possible thus the concerntration upon building a quality base becomes overly lacking to say the least in favour of numbers, first rule is the group/party in question must go about forming a cohesive bond along side an agreeable & workable program at the very least, in this situation the means to stimulate this quality building environment is simply best protected by holding off expansion in numbers(at least in the large scale)until bonds are formed, an agreed direction is being taken & teething problems are being sorted out during the process of the group's infancy.


I totally agree. A groups beginning, the early trials and tribulations which the small unit go throw, form them into a sort of brotherhood, each man a brother to the next. When pressure from the opposition threatens to break them apart, those bonds are tested and if strong the challenge on them is met and defeated, from Hermann of the Cherusci to Fidel Castro, these succesful movements have always had this in common. So I say to any white nationalist who may be reading this, if you so choose to give it a shot, to not go quietly into the night, don't rush and make sure you're comrades are as dedicated and loyal as you.

Prussian
Saturday, January 15th, 2005, 02:36 AM
I totally agree. A groups beginning, the early trials and tribulations which the small unit go throw, form them into a sort of brotherhood, each man a brother to the next. When pressure from the opposition threatens to break them apart, those bonds are tested and if strong the challenge on them is met and defeated, from Hermann of the Cherusci to Fidel Castro, these succesful movements have always had this in common. So I say to any white nationalist who may be reading this, if you so choose to give it a shot, to not go quietly into the night, don't rush and make sure you're comrades are as dedicated and loyal as you.Yes there seems to be a certain factor at play when small cohesive groups concerntrate their sole purpose of developing themselves & the agenda they are aiming for, this development process gives form to something close to a family unit in structure, each individual with his or her own position & directives in the scheme of the "family" hierarchy therefore giving one the time to develop on their position alone for the better of the collective group, if things are clear there tends to be less confusion, therefore things being precise as possible create the means of efficiency thus leading the way toward the quality desired.

Siegmund
Saturday, January 15th, 2005, 06:32 AM
All good points. There is so much that could be said here it is difficult to know where to begin. But there are two ideas that have influenced me greatly in recent months.

First, it is striking how muich of Hitler's shock in his final days was due not just to poor health and military failure but to the conduct of his closest comrades. Himmler's defection broke Hitler apart - he simply could not comprehend or accept that the former Reichsführer-SS could turn against him, whatever the reason, after all they had shared together. Hitler's loyalty to Göring in the face of the latter's sybaritic self-indulgence and execrably poor leadership of the air war is unfathomable except in the context of loyalties forged over 20 years of joint struggle. The ties between the 178 SA leaders who held the rank of Stabschef, Obergruppenfüher or Gruppenführer were forged largely from the iron and blood of the Great War, as was Hitler's bond with them. The decision of Dr. Goebbels and his wife (and of Eva Braun) to remain in the Führerbunker until the end even at the expense of their own lives and the lives of their children is also understandable only in light of deep spiritual loyalties.

The second thought is built upon the first: that the bond of loyalty must be sealed by an irrevocable act of blood. The Nacht der langen Messer, or Reichsmordwoche, or Night of the Long Knives -- this act, against a former brother in arms, more than anything else cemented Hitler's leadership of the movement as well as the position of all who shared this act with him.

Talented people with the right skills and connections, with a bond sealed in blood, forged from an act from which there can be no return... that is the cadre required to lead a revolution.

Prussian
Saturday, January 15th, 2005, 11:03 AM
All good points. There is so much that could be said here it is difficult to know where to begin. But there are two ideas that have influenced me greatly in recent months.

First, it is striking how muich of Hitler's shock in his final days was due not just to poor health and military failure but to the conduct of his closest comrades. Himmler's defection broke Hitler apart - he simply could not comprehend or accept that the former Reichsführer-SS could turn against him, whatever the reason, after all they had shared together. Hitler's loyalty to Göring in the face of the latter's sybaritic self-indulgence and execrably poor leadership of the air war is unfathomable except in the context of loyalties forged over 20 years of joint struggle. The ties between the 178 SA leaders who held the rank of Stabschef, Obergruppenfüher or Gruppenführer were forged largely from the iron and blood of the Great War, as was Hitler's bond with them. The decision of Dr. Goebbels and his wife (and of Eva Braun) to remain in the Führerbunker until the end even at the expense of their own lives and the lives of their children is also understandable only in light of deep spiritual loyalties.

The second thought is built upon the first: that the bond of loyalty must be sealed by an irrevocable act of blood. The Nacht der langen Messer, or Reichsmordwoche, or Night of the Long Knives -- this act, against a former brother in arms, more than anything else cemented Hitler's leadership of the movement as well as the position of all who shared this act with him.

Talented people with the right skills and connections, with a bond sealed in blood, forged from an act from which there can be no return... that is the cadre required to lead a revolution....indeed in the case you have mentioned it seems the strongest bonds were one's symbolised by the sacrifice of blood, this is evidently a major factor in devoted comradeship, though not the only means is one with very strong personal ties between individuals in the name of the purpose.

Jove
Saturday, January 15th, 2005, 12:02 PM
The two are mutually dependent.

Seeing as how politics is a business for the flashy, you better be the kind of person who is qualified at building up status for your party, or someone who knows well where and how to attract people who could do it for you. If your party is comprised of numerous but nonproductive and ineffective individuals, your party is about certain to evaporate on the political stage. It’s very important to look at politics as though a fashion podium of a kind; if you’re on it, you better be glaring! Thus it is particularly important that in charge of the party will be men or women with a strong character, and intelligence to muffle in. There is no question in this regard, though – good things come in small bundles.

One of the primary ways of attaining the state of fame in politics is by exhibiting quantity. You must know how to put yourself in the people’s position, and see things from their perspective. This is a sensible approach for two main reasons: (1) you will be better fit to sell people your agenda, and (2) you will be better able to evaluate how far you can push your demands, policies and overall actions. Every salesman knows that attraction is a quantitative phenomenon; his stall is more attractive to people if these people see other people at the stall, purchasing whatever services you offer. The opposite is equally true however, as a stall with little to no attendance will deter potential clients / supporters. This comes only as a testament to the collective mindset of people.

Worthwhile to remember also is that, so as to gain number, it is indispensable for your party to have some perceived merit. Hence there simply cannot be a party consisting of a lavish membership and be unsuccessful at the same time - this would either be a plain paradox, or you’re in the quite exceptional situation where you’ve attracted mainly the naïve types out there who, needless to say, don’t tend to cluster any single place in particularly large numbers (be sure to tell me if you happen to know otherwise ;) ).

Prussian
Saturday, January 15th, 2005, 12:10 PM
The two are mutually dependent.In the overall sense yes they are mutually dependent, but the question lays in the means of development in the beginning of this, thus the infancy of a developing group.

For any sucess to come later expansion is necessary however a means of quality seems to be one of contributing factors essential to any group emerging from it's infancy to adolecense so to speak, but even through later expansion the quality factor must come into play as a means to maintain the momentum of the respective group/organisation.