Message from Sherlock in Nice Respectable People Group #general
We still need to convey that we are an organization explicitly for white people
My problem with us becoming more, "American" is the question of: What will make us different from other American-advocating orgs? the term, 'American' to most normies, has negative connotation to it, people can easily say, "What about the blacks or the Chinese?" They could also use ol'reliable, "America is the melting pot!"
@Deleted User I think potentially rebranding is better than forming a new organization and we should keep the dragons eye logo. But maybe change our name to something more American like Identity Columbia and change the color scheme to red, white and blue.
If they look at us, and compare us to a civ-nat group... it would be easy for a normie to dismiss us as other, 'specifically American' groups who also wanted to keep, 'America American'
They would prefer the civ-nat group instead
If we were to Americanize our aesthetics we would need a motta to go with the logo and name that conveys we are explicitly white
And yeah what would differentiate us from TPUSA
Also, I think brand and name recognition are very important. This would toss a lot of that away, it’s like changing your name and avatar online lmao
I'm in agreement that a name change ends up making us look like milktoast civnats <:sad:366743316475281408>
"America" =/= white to a vast majority of people now imho
We're already doing so incredibly well with what we have, I think changing any of our progress would hurt more than it would do good for us. All the problems we're facing right now, is due to bad mistakes from recent leadership, but our name has not been necessarily tainted, at all either.
If we *DID* change our name, what's stopping the SPLC and ADL listing us as another "Evil white supremacist Nazi" group? It makes the loss of social capital useless, we would lose FAR more than we would potentially gain
@The Eternal Anglo or just labeling us "formerly Identity Evropa"
...though we'd probably lose that with the rebrand.
To be fair, we do a pretty good job at not being labeled "Former National Youth Front"
Yeah I don’t think Nathan’s stuff dogs us that much at all
no matter our name, rebranding will just be a new name for the (((media))) to smear as evil whitey
I think it would only be a matter of time before the SPLC/ADL crowd recognized familiar faces. What they think doesn't matter. What matters is what the average White person thinks of both us and them.
and no, we don't care what the ADL says about us, but normies do, so a rebrand doesn't fix a thing imo
and just makes us look like optics cucks
Identity CivNat is all it would look like to most. <:really:453005408064241674>
The only way a name change makes any sense is if it’s altering the message it sends. But again i think the risk/reward isnt worth it and it would be better to change the logo
I think your average White person is looks upon with the SPLC and ADL with more and more suspicion by the day. They key is continuing to agitate and drive them crazy, while leaving nothing with which to fault us.
Exactly, our target audience is to gain the trust, and respect of the average White American, not the attention of the Mass media, SPLC, and ADL.
Secondly, which this is very important... people today, now more than ever, have a *huge* distrust of the MSM, and other big orgs associated with the MSM. We're set up perfectly
If we’re going to change anything at all
I think rebranding would give us a certain distance from Charlottesville and give us more legitimacy to appeal to the average Conservative and Centrist. But we shouldn't do it to get the media or the SPLC off our backs, we should do it so we can reach our target demographic.
Plus we’re doing pretty great right now. No need for the debate atm, and I think Patrick has been pretty clear about his stance for the time being
We *ARE* optics cucks. The Optics War proved how vital optics are, lol.
@Sherlock and what is your logo suggestion? what conveys what you see as proper and bold?
optics cucking to the point of looking like boring civnats is a bridge too far though
Too much rebranding ruins the brand and the reputation that we have built with people who aren’t paying super close attention
That being said, wouldn’t mind if we change the v to a u lmao
@Asatru Artist - MD It would be an aesthetic change, not an idealogical change. It's not like we'd start accepting based Nigerians if we rebranded. So how is it optics cucking?
I just don't want IE to end up being watered down with a bunch of civnat normies that eventually *do* want to bring in That Guy T or Brian Logan or some other "Based blegs"
There would be virtually no aesthetic difference between us, and the other (majority) civnat groups in the United States. What makes us so effective is that *we are* unique in the way we present ourselves, our organisation, and our message.
@Asatru Artist - MD Same here. We'd be retaining the same leadership and standards, though.
see, changing the v to a u i could get behind
I don't know. I like the V.\
Because I’ve never given it any thought
Even if we are optics cucks, it's important not to distance ourselves too far from Charlottsville because otherwise you might invite people into our organization that won't appreciate it.
I'm going to say it: Red, white, and blue.... is **Boring.**