A Love Letter to our Cherished Donors

It’s no secret why none of the Republican presidential candidates dove for the immigration issue until Trump came along. It’s a losing and toxic issue with their target audience. It’s a winning issue with voters, of course. But voters are a secondary audience. The real battle in the early primaries is all about courting a relatively small handful of primarily Jewish, globalist, and corporate oligarch donors.

A similar dynamic plays out in our own movement, albeit in a microcosm (nanocosm?).

We here at TradYouth aren’t billionaires. We’re more like “hundredaires.” But you wouldn’t be able to tell it from the way we’ve refused to court the movement’s major financial supporters. By their account, we couldn’t be doing things more wrong. We directly confront the Jewish Question that most of the would-be donors insist that we sidestep. We target youthful radicals rather than middle-aged moderates. We push an aggressive traditionalist and social collectivist angle that doesn’t sit well with the generally libertarian and secular set who write the bigger checks.

Don’t get me wrong. I love all those guys even if they don’t always love me back. Investing real resources in promoting and protecting our endangered White identity is honorable, even you’re not doing the best job of tracking or managing your investment’s performance metrics. We love those guys, but we’re going to continue ignoring their advice because we have a plan of our own, a plan which is working by just about every performance metric one could apply.

We have hundreds of thousands of YouTube video views, just under 10,000 Facebook likes, over 1,000 Twitter followers, and a solid floor of no fewer than 1,000 actual unique visitors (excluding robots) to our site per day, even on our slow content days. Our viral memes and captioned images often achieve tens of thousands of shares. Our network of youth chapters and supporters is growing by the day. Most importantly, we’ve organized and participated in more real world street actions than any other comparable organization.

Our internal competitors can’t and won’t dispute that we achieve better metrics. Their claim is typically that while we’re indeed reaching several times more people, the message we’re reaching them with isn’t the right message. We’re mindful of that concern, and we try to walk that tightrope between being so innocuous that you receive no attention and being so obnoxious that you discredit your position.

George Lincoln Rockwell, having a family history in vaudeville, also understood that it doesn’t matter how artfully crafted one’s message is if one doesn’t manage to draw attention to it. We don’t go “full Rockwell” with swastikas and racial epithets, and we don’t need to. In his era, the media monopoly was so powerful that the only way to achieve an audience was to perform the stunts and rely on the imagery he chose.

We have a much more favorable context than Rockwell had, but we’re not at the point our competitors presume we’re at, where we can turn down all mainstream media requests, opt out of the hassle of mobilizing street demonstrations, and focus exclusively or even primarily on “influencing the elites,” academia, or entryism, or whatever. We have turned down some of the more amateurishly hostile media engagements, but we have a bias towards action and exposure commensurate with our insurgent tactical context.

Imagine what we could have achieved by now if we hadn’t been limited financially to self-funding and a small but loyal set of donors regularly pitching in monthly amounts. We’re hopeful that the mega-donors will come around soon, and there are some promising indications on the backend that they’re coming around to our way of seeing things. But until then, we’re still relying on you, modest regular donor, to keep this vehicle chugging along.

This month we achieved an exciting fundraising development, a $100 donation through bitcoin. Historically speaking, bitcoin donations have been dwarfed by more conventional corporate means of donating. Moving forward, we can expect more of the same petty harassment and attempts to shut down our income streams. While this vehicle will continue moving forward if I have to get out and push the vehicle forward myself, I encourage folks to get the jump on our opponents and get hip to means of supporting worthy initiatives which are immune to antifa social engineering shenanigans.

We geeks intimidate people away from bitcoin with all of our fanciful talk of its revolutionary potential and algorithmic elegance. But for normies, it’s really just a handy way to transfer money that’s as straightforward as Western Union. The only meaningful difference is that your money’s going to identitarian activists rather than Nigerian aristocrats.

We fully respect that supporting us is a choice, and we know how difficult it is in today’s economy to scrounge up the money to donate. There are several quality identitarian projects worthy of support. We get that. But we have every reason to believe that our project is a worthwhile investment for folks looking to do their part to secure a future for our people worth showing up for. Our donors are at least as important as us folks out there on the streets, in the bylines, and in the video clips.

Some names may be more visible than others, but this struggle is so much bigger than me or you. We’re merely stewards of the resources and support we’re entrusted with. And we’re very thankful for the bountiful resources and support we’re receiving. We strive to make it obvious that your investments are directly fueling useful work, and we’re always striving to be more efficient and effective with the trust invested in us.

When you invest in our project, you become a stakeholder in the most active and effective project in America’s identitarian and traditionalist revolution. Not everybody can jeopardize their careers or expose themselves or their families to the persecution that comes with identitarian activism in today’s environment. We get that, and we respect that. Not everybody’s meant to be a public activist. But everybody must do something at this critical hour. If you can’t or won’t publicly or anonymously support our project, please find some way to invest in our cause.

It can all seem very hopeless, pointless, and discouraging, but we must never forget the stakes. Your grandchildren’s safety, security, and even lives depend on it.



Once you establish popular power, the money for projects follows. People throwing money at you to be silent about Jews are people that should be kept at arms length to say the least. The problem with the white movement is that the self-appointed intellectuals and the most influential donors are behind the masses–who in the current state of society are increasingly hungry for answers that are more radical than what they offer.

Average white people can’t grasp the Jewish question, they say? Go to any given supermarket in a lower middle class town and hand out fliers outlining the Kosher tax, and what the money is used for. You’ll see people struggling with their supermarket bills will at the minimum entertain the thought. Some of them will be willing to fight by your side.


I’m not donating unless I can get some TradYouth swag like swastika coffee mugs, TradYouth beer koozies, or miniature weaponized orthodox crosses.

Swiss Kinist

I prefer a slew of small organizations who stay small. Seems that whenever something gets big of well-backed financially, it turns corrupt, by nature. I think the same thing goes with businesses, which is why I put high priority on small, local businesses.

Matt Parrott

It’s sort of a chicken or the egg conundrum, perhaps. To grow past a certain point, you’ve got to “go public,” sort of like an IPO? Or does growing big make it difficult to keep your focus and principles?

Swiss Kinist

I definitely can’t speak from experience on either a business or organizational standpoint, but just from observation I would say, yes, it does make it difficult to keep your focus and principles. I’d rather just not grow, at least from a business perspective. If it is too big for my family to run, then it is too big (and needs to stay local anyway).

But organizations that are designed to be national are probably a whole other beast. I like your dividing into local chapters concept. Hopefully that keeps evil in check, but I don’t know. It’s a good discussion topic.


Small organizations that stay small can’t beat federal, Zionist power, or Wall street. This isn’t a fencing club.

Swiss Kinist

Neither can your organization, no matter how big it gets:

“Thus saith the Lord; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord.” — Jeremiah 17:5


Says who? I can probably find a bunch of quotes in the Bible to support the idea that yes , something can be done about it.

You can interpret the Bible in an infinite number of ways, not wise to base arguments on theology.


Your statement here, though, has only one clear and unambiguous interpretation and is, therefore, meaningful in a way Holy Scripture isn’t?

Say “no” and you run the risk of none of us understanding what you’re saying or worse – by your own principle, you ought not be writing messages at all.

Say “yes” and you’re giving yourself some magical divinity that you don’t grant to Scripture and that sounds a little naive.


I find the use of the bible to promote libertarian cynicism to be counter-productive in respects to white interests.

There’s countless examples in history of large, successful organizations led by good, honorable and selfless men.


That’s neither here nor there. I’m worried about how to interpret your posts.

Or, are there thousands of ways to interpret Scripture, but only one way to interpret Eric? A sort of “thus sayeth Eric” magic that ensures accurate transmission that the Christian God doesn’t have access to?


Well…I’m here to clear up any misinterpretations of my words, thus I am authoritative.

An unlimited number of Christian sects, and Jewish , and Islamic ones, all claim to be the true inheritors of the bible’s original tradition, despite all of them differing radically in their interpretation. The Bible is largely a vehicle that people give meaning to depending on their own collective temperament or individual personality, whether it has any supernatural powers or not.

That’s why it’s useless to tell me a large national political movement can’t succeed because the bible says so, because I can easily scroll through its verses and probably find something to substantiate the opinion that it can.

Swiss Kinist

I prefer the way North America used to be set up; several sovereign, Christian, small states, who control their own destiny (and even really, the local governments control their locality for the most part), but can work together for a common cause if needed.

I do NOT prefer the way it is now, with one giant federal government telling all localities what to do. But I realize that contradicts your Hitler worship religion, where the central government is all powerful and individual liberty is thwarted.

There can be no productive conversation with two opposing world views, which is why non-Christians should not be leagued together in the same organization as with Christians; part of the reason why I don’t support Trad Youth financially.


Well, as an Anabaptist, you practice Judaism with Christian window drapes (Worms prophets), so your hostility towards Hitler and Greco-Roman concepts of governance are understandable and indeed impossible to reconcile. To think a political movement must conform to your own very narrow interpretation of Christianity to be valid is the height of arrogance.

Like it or not, a future nationalist America will require central government to protect the race and its revolution. If the original liberal system was so great, it would’ve prevented America from becoming the shit hole it is today.

Swiss Kinist

We have had this conversation before about Anabaptism and Judaism so I will chalk that up to you being purposely dishonest, which is to be expected from someone who has no reason to be honest. Without a Christian world view you have no basis to claim anyone aught to be honest.

I have no hostility toward Hitler. I teach an honest and balance world view to my family regarding Hitler, because we all know the Allies version of the story is false and bearing false witness against Hitler and National Socialist Germany.


Yes we have, and it was unconvincing. Anabaptism is, if we were to take a Western Christian position, a Hebraist or Judaizing movement.

What is dishonest are the people who use alt-trite codewords for racial nationalism, like “kinism”, in hopes that Jews will not know what it means. Seems like your worldview is passive aggressive bloviation and self-importance, you can keep it. This struggle is for people willing to give and expect nothing in return–not even Jesus patting you on the head.


If I can’t understand your words the first time, why will more words help?

…this is a side issue I know, but you’ve made a fairly damning stab at my Faith and it doesn’t seem like you can support it.



If you’re being facetious or sarcastic, don’t expect me to grasp it in a text comment.


Which were you being when you claimed the Bible is impossible to understand?

I can suggest some reading material for you if you’d like to delve into the vast area of study that is linguistic philosophy (and its practical corollary: hermeneutics).

Swiss Kinist

Well you can go ahead and have at it. But you have absolutely no moral basis to even claim that international jewry should be opposed, or that the white race shouldn’t be exterminated. I pray God will bring you to the end of yourself so that you can see what Jesus said was absolutely true:

“Without me ye can do nothing.” — John 15:5

Ezra Pound

It bugs me the way the homosexual-entryist/anti-Christian wing of the alt-right always seems flush with cash, but anyone pushing traditionalism and Christ is pretty much left to their own devices.

Leave a Reply