Q&A AND JOHN AND GOING FORWARD
—“Good afternoon, Curt. I hope you’re well. You don’t know me, but from the sidelines I’ve been following you, John, In Truth Victorious, and reading up on P for the better part of 6 months or so since I first heard about it. I’ve shared the ideas and information – including John’s videos – with those at work and in my social circles whom I felt could handle the information without jumping immediately to the “racism” conclusion.
My condolences at John’s departure. Like him, I’ve faced many service-before-self vs service-before-family decisions, and have had to keep a low profile due to the nature of my military profession for the safety of my family. So I can certainly understand what John’s departure can do…if that’s really what has happened, that is.
Like you appear to be able to do, I’ve both learned how to think on the tactical, operational, and strategic levels – and taught to as well by the military (now retired – thank God).
I’ll offer speculation only – no answer required – but here’s what comes to my mind. Are you perhaps testing the resiliency of the movement by having one of the most popular voices step aside?
In doing so, you provided a motivational push to get other quiet members who would otherwise be leaders to step forward, as if John were a crutch for them all along and they just shared his videos around instead of organizing properly.
If so, it appears to be working a bit – at least on the Propertarian Party West page from what I’ve seen (the page I’m a member of). However, another possibility arises – that John Mark is a pseudonym, and that him sacrificing this persona in order to take the “other opportunities” (as you so slyly put it) to create another persona – just as charismatic and knowledgeable as John happened to be – and rise to the figurehead.
It could also be twofold: test the resiliency of the following, and allow for a charismatic leader to rise. After all, John did say in his final video that he was getting tired of the helmet. If so (which I’m hoping is the case) then well played. Well played indeed.
Still, if it turns out that his departure is genuine, then I wish him the best and safety for his family in the months and years to come. Regardless of what happens, I’ll sill be rooting for you from the shadows, and helping out where I can within my own circle of influence.”— (A friend)
CURT’S RESPONSE:
Great questions.
1) I let john carry the entire burden of the political wing, while I worked on the intellectual wing and the leadership. This is generally how I work in partership with people: division of labor. Check in when necessary. Let people do their thing.
2) John believed we could turn the ‘right that is left behind’ into a political movement, becuse P explains the origin of our people, effectively says our way of life god’s way, and with the constitution, we could ‘buy off’ the various parties into creating a homeland for our people under our traditional way of life – that is god’s law.
3) My strategy was to employ of what I learned at Maydan, and make use of the NS/WN militancy (praavy secktor), the patriot’s dedication (nationalists), and john’s mainstream morality (Normiecon Families), to get enough men to show, that we created a ‘credible threat’, and that because of that threat we would capture the natuional narrative by fear of what we “MIGHT” do, and use that control of the national narrative to focus on the issues and drive change in our favor just as BLM/Antifa hve done by doing bad stuff. The difference is wa had the moral high ground and Antifa/BLM don’t. They’re communist terrorists. The fallback was that if they failed to meet our demands and solve the wants of all parties, that those men who showed would feel they had the moral high ground with which to convert a credible threat into direct action. We could use normies for protests, and the rest for direct action. The direct action was dedicated to working against infrastructure, not people, and continuing to control the narrative by doing it. This strategy would have worked flawlessly. (still could really).
4) Unfortunately, with the ‘acceleration’, we needed to make a move to get this set before the election. ohn needed to be the frontman but couldn’t drop the helmet, and I couldn’t even ask him to. We also didn’t have time to get on message that the NS/WN needed to shut up and normie-up, to make it work – until and if, the negotiations failed. So I’m an optics insensitive elitist in your face nerd that plays strategy, and our launch – where I did my job – in the eyes of the self-defeating, purity-spiral that is the young, broken, dissident right, provoked their self-image rather than their reason, and they piled on us with their hate, not knowing we were their only route to immediate success before the left recaptures the government and turns on them with the full force of the pent up anger of the left against white people. In startup terms we were forced to “launch too early.”
5) So I am ruthless, heartless and teflon, but john is not. He gave up on the right as too broken, raw, and hateful, to “man up, shut up, and show up, and win”. I don’t see it that way. I see desperation. I see broken people that need him in front, me behind, and a warrior behind me, so that we cover all three conservative demographics, to keep at it, and get people on board with that strategy. And that a small number of catbois, incels, and leftists, that are not for our people, but for the status quo, are able to ruin it for everyone.
6) So I am in the process of making it clear that I’m teflon, that I love their hate, that these people are our enemy, then returning to message, educating, and seeing if I can put together the two other men we need: a fatherly priestly politician (like john), and a ‘man of men’ with miltary and working-class bearing to hold the boys, so that I can hold the intellectuals. this will work but whether I can get it done before the election is something else.
7) As for whether we’re playing a game with John leaving, that’s a no. Our thing is truth and that’s not our way. Can we get him back? Well, it is very hard for moral men to abandon their people in a time of need. I suspect YOU can get him if he understands you need him. But he would need to come back for you. If not we will find another. There are other candidates that want to be heroes. And it might be better to have a candidate out front that didn’t need a mask to protect his family.
8) He demonstrated a political movement is possible. But we need to be better at it. So I’m using his departure as an opportunity to enact change. He gave us moral license by leaving. he showed what the bad people do. He gave me evidence to work with. And I’m using it.
9) InTruthVictorious (ITV) produces better educational content than john. You should follow him. He is exceptionally good and he’s just getting started. We’ll ask him to focus on education and explanation and inspiration rather than editorial.
I suspect if John stays out, we will use ITV as the media wing, producer and educator, and find a pure frontman. We have a few candidates for frontman in mind already. It will take us some time.
We will have the digital signature system online sometime very soon.
I will continue my ‘campaign against’ the evil right (or at least the evil internet boys).
10) I am great as a frontman for elites and intellectuals – my peers. I am not good as a frontman for middle and bottom. But otherwise, I am very good at my job. Because P-law, and its explanation of the Aryan peoples is eternal, and politics is a marathon or a war, and winning and losing battles is just a cost of that war. But wars are won by endurance. And there are just too many of us, too dedicated, too enthusiastic in this movement who have that endurance.
11) we need to make sure we address ALL communities: ns, wn, separatists, and yes, even civnats. But the only way to do that is to get everyone to stay on message in favor of policy not their small group’s message. … this is a division of labor. we need it all.
(FYI: Daniel T. Johnson, In Truth Victorious )
Source date (UTC): 2020-07-11 10:57:00 UTC