Politics & Power Quote by Francis Parker Yockey

Yockey’s sentence tries to launder a dangerous idea into the language of “real” politics: hatred, he insists, is an impurity, a symptom, a tell. The rhetorical move is tidy and manipulative. By defining political thinking as something clean, strategic, and disciplined, he frames mass animus not as an instrument of power but as evidence of insecurity. That sounds like a critique of demagoguery, but the subtext points elsewhere: it’s a plea for colder, more competent authoritarianism.

The key word is “contained.” Hatred, he argues, shouldn’t leak into political reasoning; if it does, the regime is weak at home. That’s not a moral claim about the harm hatred does to its targets. It’s a managerial claim about what hatred reveals about the state. The “public enemy” becomes a pressure valve: whipping up hostility is “non-political” because it’s compensatory, a substitute for genuine cohesion or legitimacy. In this framing, scapegoating isn’t condemned for being cruel; it’s criticized for being tactically amateur.

Context matters. Yockey wrote in the post-World War II shadow of fascism’s collapse, when overt racial hatred had become politically radioactive in mainstream Western discourse but remained central in extremist circles. The quote reads like an internal memo to radicals: stop the froth, build a more stable ideological machinery. Hatred, for Yockey, is not an ethical failure. It’s a diagnostic: when you need it, you’re already in trouble.