[Seeing the transformation of our country and the entire Western world, is a daunting realization; only the stalwart will survive.
The quest for clarity is on, and a recent discussion prompted an investigation into this subject. Below, is an important aspect of what, surely, is on the minds of every member of our folk-community. The Staff]
The Military Option 
Every White Nationalist knows that history repeats itself.
The birth, life and passing of all cultures and races repeats itself, endlessly.
Many individuals have dissected this process; many have missed the mark. Moreover, who really knows whom the gods favor, and what path they require for sustained victory?
During the past 3500 years one can, with a degree of clarity, see the necessary ingredients for a successful change in political and social standings; democracy, being that ubiquitous sign of degeneration, having tasted the droppings of power and authority, seeks ever to distill the best from the worst, thereby, regardless of the principled men and women who inhabit and work endlessly to promote equal representation, and the continuation of the people, as a ruling construct, at least the shadow of this desire remain, forever. outside the shadow of reality.
Power comes and goes in the halls of justice.
What remains is the constrained, and ofttimes rogue elements of real power: The Power of The Gun.
Standing Armies have always been the vanguard of entrenched ruling classes; whether for ill or good, men under arms exist. The Brotherhood of War is a long established fraternity, with implications far out-weighing the intransigent politician who, for lucre’s sake, peddles his wares.
Ultimately, men of War are necessary, be this Fyrdung, or Army of the Folk, or traditional ‘professional’ armies, limited by land and tribal necessities, to protect common relations, and citizens in the larger sense.
Democracy, as we see its fulfillment today, is no different than Caesar’s precursors or of Napoleon; the difference, today, is only one of timing and perseverance, with a little help from our friends in the Military.
Those of us who come from a background of military or law-enforcement service, can not be defined, as was the case a generation ago, as protecting a class of persons akin to the rest, patrolling streets where we knew most of the residents; or in the Field, fighting for causes which were ingrained with patriotic zeal, ideological affirmation, that traditional basis for mass mobilization.
American Military Officers, in the main, went through traditional, mostly Southern War Colleges, and thereby passed on to future generations of Western stock, the accumulated knowledge of sacrifices and intrepid courage, necessary to survive war, at whatever level, so that the host might survive and extend its hard-won achievements.
The Loyalty of the Officer Corps in European history is a storied one, but reaffirms the need and necessity of this class; Soldiers, as a rule, exist for the tactical and logistical support of an Officer class who, in turn, are maintained by a worthy State-craft. As we all know, this ‘civilian’ counterpart, as in our present time, has betrayed the yeoman-folk who maintain the legacy of our fathers and mothers; the Officer corps, straining at the bit, have followed the orders and strategies of a dozen presidential offices which, by any account, have allowed an international and domestic degeneration to grow and continue unabated.
Wars breed warriors. This is axiomatic.
Democracy, as a construct, maintains the will of the people, and armed cohorts remain their weapon of first choice. What, then, do warriors do in a democracy? As the civilian government maintains hegemony, the warriors are scuttled back into their barracks, to play at more war, waiting for orders. Officers, as well, study, and are paid very well by their masters to ‘stay out of the way’. This works in general, but the tension between the two is millennial.
So, how to get the Military on our side? Money.
Knowing, and having much personal relationships with the Officer Corps, as well as knowing the historical nuances of this discussion, it has become apparent that the integrity and moral fiber has, once again, gone to those who make or break a people, for the highest bid. Like medieval Europe, the creation of ‘mercenary armies’ have become the mainstay of our modern State.
American corporate interests, as a rule, support the infrastructure of the government, and by tacit complicity, bankroll the military, as the functioning arm of both their protection, and their expansion. As long as the money and power flow, there is a symbiotic relationship. Once this becomes estranged, a vacuum becomes apparent and must, of necessity, be filled; this requires, in many instances, a new and friendly government, as well as a trusted military component. Moreover, this follows an atmosphere of change, of revolution, and becomes the watch-word of the day. This has always been inevitable.
The military, such as we see generally as being a part of the necessary regimen of Western life, is beholden not too ideology, such as the Nationalist sees, but lucre. Smedly Butler said as much; Caesar as well, and Napoleon. Nationalism, a racial grass-roots phenomenon is, by definition, folk-based, yet these elements of power are transient, as seen by those in power, and remains in the shadow of fear and mistrust.
Gaining the support of the Military proper is, without doubt, a dubious one, at least on a large scale. How, then, do nationalists gain the support and respect of our traditional ‘brothers-at-arms’?
Firstly, entrenched fraternities are self-absorbed, myopic, and fraught with the idea that might makes right, as prima facie evidence of their superiority; this has much historical validity. To support, or ally themselves with a ‘new’ power, whether retrograde of forward-looking is relative to the exchange of currencies – such as public acclaim, wealth, social position – in short, the necessity of transformation or alliance is based not on the right of a thing, but on the expediency of the end-game.
Secondly, cut the military out of this equation, and the Corporate privateers become those slippery, mobile bishops in this game; the ability to ‘make money’, if jeopardized, becomes the necessary counter move to overt Taxation, outright confiscation of material production, or enterprise which, cumulatively, make up an entire class of people. When threatened, regardless of the dire straits of the People, money becomes the pivotal mark of their survival. Hence, the Military.
The common ‘grunt’ in the military is another matter.
Getting support from a White Marine is relatively easy, especially relative to the recent ‘wars’ on foreign soil. They are angry, scared and disgusted. The present regime is rightly concerned about sections of their ‘armed guard’. As White men and Women, they are already converted against those who sent them to be killed, but lack that specific ingredient for group change: Permission .
Nationalism gives that permission, because it speaks to the heart and soul of our kind, yet lacks the acceptance of the established military order. This is changing.
The opposing debate from certain quarters of the ‘brotherhood of war’ that, service related members share more than a uniform, that race does not matter, is proved false if one visits any military base, or war-field experience. The duty or treason of our military is seen in stark relief, when the training, expertise and largess are spent on multicultural cohorts who, then, pass this training onto others of their kind who, when the tough times come, will pass that training on to others of their own kind, at the expense of their masters, such as Caesar experienced. We are no different.
There will have to be a cleansing, and this will be problematic for Nationalists for, at first, the Nationalist will be attacked from both sides; the lines have already been drawn. He will have to brave the elements, pass through the system, and convert both the social class as well as the military. This will, once again, depend upon the fear and anxiety of the Corporate class. It is moving in this direction, how fast is another matter.
Do we need the Military, yes.
Do we pursue military contacts for the sake of offensive strategy? This remains to be seen. Do we wait for their support, in lieu of addressing the issues most dear to our people, and ourselves, no. In every field of endeavor, the military have proved themselves worthy of distinction, as professional men, intent upon defining and refining their profession. Nationalists must do the same for mutual respect to be gained. The days of Ludendorff may be in the making, once again; or maybe not. Nevertheless, the overtures of that time have their merit today, and we should not hesitate to make our positions known, on a case by case basis, to those who are sympathetic.
 excerpt, Song of Albion, Chapter IV, Into The Abyss.