Greg Johnson has penned an essay about Oswald Spengler and racial decadence that arrives at some pretty sweeping conclusions. A few days ago, Robert Campbell altered me to the existence of this article in a telephone conversation.
Three Senses of Race
Cutting to the meat of the essay, Greg Johnson starts off by arguing that race exists in three primary senses, the biological, cultural, and psychological:
1.) Race can refer to populations which vary by geography in gene frequencies and phenotype.
2.) Race can refer to having “racial consciousness.”
3.) Race can prefer to a primordial, life affirming, vital determination to expand and propagate and expand your tribe.
Nothing to argue with here. I would only dispute the idea that “racial consciousness” is “backward looking” whereas race in the psychological sense is “forward looking.”
In Colonial America, racial consciousness and race in the psychological sense evolved out of pre-existing English ideas and attitudes. Both were a response to the environmental conditions faced by Englishmen in the New World. The settlers took elements of their tradition (i.e., the concepts of just war and private property) and adapted them to their circumstances.
In the eighteenth century, Americans began the project of racial classification and interpretation of racial differences. “Science” itself (a method of understanding the natural world) is a tradition that stretches back into the Middle Ages and Greco-Roman Antiquity.
There is no conflict between “progress” and “tradition.” The only way to make “progress” is by working within the bounds of a tradition. This is most clearly seen in the history of technology where incremental advances in existing technology have led to new conceptual breakthroughs. Thus, the telegraph evolved over time into the cell phone, or the Kitty Hawk into the Columbia space shuttle.
Race and Culture
Having established the three senses of race (biological, cultural, and psychological), Greg Johnson moves on to argue that race informs culture, and vice versa. Nothing to argue with here either.
The societies built by Europeans are an extended phenotype. They reflect underlying heritable characteristics like intelligence and personality traits. At the same time, cultural memes (which are not heritable) are constantly influencing mate selection, which over time will change a population at the biological level.
Race Platonism and Race Traditionalism
Following Spengler, Greg Johnson next begins to discuss “Race Platonism” and “Race Traditionalism,” which he defines as 1.) that racial archetypes that are immutable forms and 2.) that the modern races have degenerated from ideal forms that existed in the distant past.
Both are easily dismissed.
“Race Traditionalism” is easily refuted by the fossil evidence of archaeology. “Race Platonism” is refuted by everything we know about modern biology and genetics.
If all racial minority groups were expelled from North America tomorrow, the White population would still evolve. Natural selection would continue to operate on mutations and genetic drift. In the absence of gene flow, Whites and non-Whites would eventually diverge into separate species.
Change is inevitable.
Outside of the “Radical Traditionalist” community, this idea is uncontroversial in White Nationalist circles.
Racial Preservation – Getting It Wrong
Having established the three types of race, the fact that culture informs race, and that genetic change is inevitable, Greg Johnson moves into more controversial territory. He declares that “racial preservation” is tantamount to “death.”
Johnson’s error begins in setting up a straw man of racial preservation. The ideal of “racial preservation” is not analogous to, say, killing a deer and having a taxidermist mount it on your wall, as everyone recognizes that gene frequencies change in each generation.
“Racial preservation” means nothing more than declaring that some traits (i.e., fair skin, fair hair, fair eyes, high intelligence, amiable personality, etc.) should be favored, selected, and encouraged in our culture.
This can be easily accomplished: Whites and non-Whites can be geographically separated, non-White immigration can be banned, the traditional American racial ideal can be promoted in all types of media, miscegenation can be outlawed, the tax code could be altered to encourage eugenic marriages, social services that deter family formation can be eliminated, etc.
If American culture and public policy was changed tomorrow, say, to reflect the White Nationalist racial idea, the United States would become more racially and culturally European over time, which is exactly what happened between Reconstruction and the the Civil Rights Movement. When JFK was elected president, America was almost 90% White; this happened by design, not by accident.
Racial Purity – Getting It More Wrong
After developing this idea that “racial preservation” is “death,” through an interpretation of Oswald Spengler, Greg Johnson goes on to attack the idea of “racial purity,” which he claims is incompatible with race in the psychological sense as a viral, life affirming world outlook.
Historically speaking, it only takes a moment’s reflection to dismiss this idea. In Colonial America, the ideal of racial preservation and race in the psychological sense evolved together and complemented each other. “Racial purity” meant nothing more than the determination of English settlers to preserve their European phenotype.
The frontiersmen had the will to power to seize land, clear it of Indians, and erect towns and cities. As White settlement expanded along the Atlantic seaboard, the first anti-miscegenation laws were passed; a racial caste system emerged; an elaborate code of racial etiquette began to govern racial interaction.
The “healthy men of race” – the American settlers – were expansionists who still thought of themselves as Englishmen, increasingly thought of themselves as Whites, and eventually codified their ideal of racial preservation into law. Like Americans have always done, they thought about the past, present, and the future.
There is no opposition between “vitality” and “racial purity.” If that were the case, 350 years of American history would be incomprehensible.
White Nationalism Is Degenerate – Jumping the Tracks
Greg Johnson concludes that “racial preservation” is “death” (from 1665 to 1967, America was dead) and that “racial purity” is somehow opposed to “vitality” (like when we conquered the North American continent). The next logical step is to conclude that White Nationalism is “overwhelmingly a degenerate movement.”
White Nationalism is condemned as degenerate … because, somehow, White Nationalists don’t want to Whites to evolve into the Talosians from Star Trek or Elves from Lord of the Rings. By advocating racial preservation (i.e., erecting barriers to non-White admixture), we are “murdering” and “mummifying” our race.
Well, I disagree.
Greg Johnson is condemning the healthy elements of White Nationalism as degenerate. By healthy, I mean White Nationalists advocate America’s traditional racial and cultural ideals over modern progressive ones, which is to say, we select for European phenotype.
Among other things, White Nationalists want to separate the races, ban miscegenation, increase the birthrate, and promote aesthetic images of White beauty and health in the media. What is degenerate about that?
Progressives advocate miscegenation, race anarchy, White guilt, transfers of wealth from Whites to non-Whites, third world immigration, multiculturalism, affirmation action, and diversity. If there is something “healthy” about the progressive agenda (the first interracial kiss occurred on Star Trek), I certainly have never seen it.
White Nationalists are degenerates, but not for the reasons Greg Johnson describes. The problem is that White Nationalists, even the ones who have given up America (yours truly included), are still culturally American themselves. Even the most diehard racialists are only a few degrees mentally removed from the American cultural mainstream.
The same degeneracy that afflicts American culture in general (expressive individualism being the best example) has deeply penetrated the White Nationalist movement. When Neo-Nazis parade through Toledo, they are simply carrying on the long established avant-garde tradition of shocking the bourgeoisie. When White Nationalists get piercings and tattoos, they are merely aping their aracial peers.
I could continue to list examples, but the two above are sufficient to establish my point. White Nationalists are not immune to their cultural environment. It is a constant struggle to separate ourselves, mentally and physically, from the sewage that pulsates through our culture. Even the best of us are subtly influenced by it.
A “Vital” White Nationalism
Now that “racial preservation” has been labeled “death,” “racial purity” called “mummifying the race,” and White Nationalism has been pronounced “an overwhelmingly degenerate movement,” Greg Johnson wants to create a new vital White Nationalism, and has a few ideas as to how to go about this.
His starting point: the “animal vitality” of a Star Trek convention. I’ve known Trekkies in the past. None of them have struck me as particularly virile. Quite the opposite.
Johnson diagnoses the problem: White Nationalism is “conservative,” which is to say, “backward looking,” devitalized, decadent, decadent, and gloomy. Star Trek is “progressive,” which means forward-looking, optimistic, and hopeful.
Come on, Greg.
This isn’t even a good interpretation of Star Trek. In TOS, Captain Kirk fought the Klingons. In TNG, the show bombed until the Borg were created as a villain. The Deep Space Nine series was entirely about war with a race called “The Dominion.” Voyager bombed until the Borg returned as the major villain. Finally, Enterprise was a flop, even after the directors tried to revive the show through a grab bag of conflicts with the Klingons, Borg, Xindi, and Romulans. In the latest Star Trek movie, a Romulan time traveler destroys Vulcan, the home planet of Spock.
There are no social penalties (aside from nerdiness) with being labeled a Trekkie. No one loses their job or goes to prison for watching Star Trek. No one utterly dehumanizes Trekkies. They are not socially ostracized by their own families. This is a really bad analogy.
In Johnson’s view, a “vital White Nationalist movement” would be a “utopian, progressivist, eugenicist mythical-cultural phenomenon.” Maybe something like a combination of Star Trek and Lord of the Rings. I think this prescription speaks more to Johnson’s aesthetic and intellectual tastes than it does to reality.
History: Our Guide
Greg Johnson thinks we should look to the future as our guide. I think we should look to our past. What factors motivated White Americans to seize their racial destiny and conquer a continent?
Answer: it was a combination of things.
The American colonies were established out of religious, commercial, and geopolitical motives. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the English wanted to rid themselves of a swarming underclass, compete with France and Spain in the New World, create an outlet for their industrial production and a source of raw materials, and bring the Gospel to the New World.
As Virginia and the other colonies matured, Americans expropriated land from the Indians. The Indians were considered savages, heathens, and non-Whites. They were squatting on land which the colonists could develop and build into a free society. For racial, ethnic, religious, moral, and economic reasons, the Indians were dispossessed and pushed further West.
In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, science labeled non-Whites inferior, and studies were produced that convinced the brightest minds to support segregation. Greedy settlers motivated by self-interest poured into Indian lands. Racial idealism and geopolitical rivalry with Britain motivated Americans annex Texas and seize the West from Mexico.
In sum, Americans conquered North America for commercial, religious, geopolitical, cultural, political, moral, racial, ethnic, intellectual and self-interested reasons. Everything from racial idealism to religion to science to morality to divine providence was cited to justify the expropriation.
The lesson to be learned from this is that White Nationalists should appeal to the full suite of human interests, not any specific one, to justify the reconquest.
Devitalization
What crippled the American project?
One European bad idea after another: liberalism, anti-slavery, natural rights ideology, communism, democracy, capitalism, millenarianism, anarchism, fascism, anti-racism, expressive individualism, libertarianism, postmodernism, feminism, nihilism, humanism, etc.
The effete sons of rough frontiersmen became infatuated and possessed by these abstract ideas. These abstractions were pushed to ever newer extremes at the expense of common sense, self interest, and tradition. When combined with material abundance, they produced the moral rot which has always been the source of republican decline.
Oswald Spengler can be included in this category: Western Civilization is doomed, cultures go through life cycles, we are living in the terminal phase of civilization. I can’t think of a better prescription for helplessness and inaction than Spenglerian historical determinism.
Revitalizing the White Nationalist movement lies in recapturing the racial attitude of our pioneer ancestors. The solution does not lie in the dust covered books of long dead European philosophers.
Maybe America’s something else — and when I consider the racial types and numbers of them involved, I’m inclined to believe it is — but such amicable relations are possible — and routine — at levels much lower than “Smartmanistan.” Certainly they are here where I live.
This isn’t to cheer-lead for such societal arrangements. Personally, I find them fantastically underwhelming, uninspiring, strained, forced, antiseptic. But you can’t proceed on a faulty understanding of what people perceive or experience in such conditions; and to deny that they’re ever tolerable or enjoyable can only continue to hobble racialism/WN’s attempts to broaden its reach.
Your point is partially answered by a later comment from Brutus re Smartistan:
because all of my life I have both observed and heard from nearly every quarter that the environment in, around, and amongst the workers and executives in these “world beating” companies is, and is bluntly called, “cut throat.”
Arab computer geeks can work side by side with Jew computer geeks and Hindu computer geeks because ALL of them know that they are getting paid in money and connections to work their fingers to the bone, until they burn out. The economic rat-race crushes ethnic connection and personal life.
Note that many computer geeks fail to produce children! So while the work may be profitable – mostly for the bosses, less so for the workers – the materialistic rat-race is probably a bad strategy to ensure the survival of your genes!
So these diverse cultures are not just “uninspiring, strained, forced, antiseptic” – they tend to prevent reproduction!
As a side issue, Matt Parrott wrote:
The critical factor is that many of the people in the movement are historical hobbyists, autistic types who understand the situation in purely statistical and factual terms,…
As the movement gathers momentum, those people will gradually disappear. The historical hobbyists will lose interest as we fail to remain true to their fantasy quests.
The autistic types will move on to different heretical facts.
I think the autistic types have considerable overlap with the historical hobbyists. (Perhaps most people would classify me as a member of both classes.) This overlap is probably why the “white movement” has been called a “white stuckment.” The “movement” doesn’t move because the obsessive pedants refuse to budge from intellectual extremism.
If the A3P types gather momentum quickly and start winning elections for local office within ten years, there might be a noticeable shift. The “white movement” might become a mass movement, and the autistic intellectuals will indeed move on as you say.
If, on the other hand, the A3P types do not win any elections for ten years or more, the autistic intellectuals might be dead of old age before the momentum pushes them out. Presumably, if they have been very good, Revilo P. Oliver will be waiting to welcome them into the afterlife.
I hope you are not denigrating Revilo Oliver. If so, then there is much about this movement that you have yet to learn, much of which is not readily available or discussed.
Oliver told and instructed many of the best men we have had what to do and how to best go about it. He made many suggestions, including methods and possible venues to propagate our mesage. His hand is present in many places. And his decades of service and sacrifice in the defense of and waking up to certain facts of our race in a time when it looked to him as though maybe not 100 whites were left who were even capable of caring took a hell of a lot of fortitude. It is easy for some today, who are standing on the shoulders of other men who were fighting and being demonized when everyone else was oblivious to the peril and instead enjoying the privilage of the decades of the best materialistic and wealth earning potential of any era of human history, to talk about how little the movement has accomplished and how bad everyone who came before was. It is easy for some today, who have the Internet and so many other modern tools of cummunication and outreach, and a potential pool of people who are receptive or will very shortly be receptive due to the current situation and its irresistable implications, who are not living in the era when there was a total monopoly on ALL media, when there were only 3 television stations all owned or controlled by Jews, when radio was off limits, and all newspapers except small local ones were nothing but echoes of the New York Times, when you could essentially only hand out a few pamplets on street corners, when you could not even get a book or article published to be read by a potential target, it is easy to talk about how little some men accomplished when this was the reality.
Oliver was the best we had, and in more than a few ways.
“By the standards of our people, it is. An STD ridden population of utterly impoverished Mongoloids would qualify as a cesspool by any reasonable definition. The point is that “vitality,” understood in a simplistic and crude sense, is not enough. Mongolia is now a mere plaything of other powers, barely deserving of notice. An impoverished backwater, a cautionary tale.”
This is inane in the extreme, Trainspotter.
There’s no evidence I’m aware of that the Mongolians in Mongolia are mixed.
The fact that Mongolians conquerors in Uzbekistan seem to have mixed with Caucasoid groups would not have made the Mongolians in Mongolia mixed.
“of utterly impoverished Mongoloids”
I love the fact that you include them being Mongoloids, when the reason they’re still Mongoloids is exactly because they didn’t mix.
Also, the Mongolians have always been impoverished except when they’ve been able to loot from conquered peoples.
The reason the Mongolians aren’t looting now is largely because the technological advantages which were a necessary condition of their past victories are no longer salient to modern warfare.
“How ‘vital’ are the Portugese today, whether in their homeland or in Brazil?”
They’re plenty vital in Portugal, at least by European standards. For example, they’ve done a far better job of maintaining control over their own territory against invaders relative to a lot of Western Countries.
Per capita income is hardly the best measure of vitality.
“I understand this, but check out the per capita figures. For example, compare per capita GDP in Brazil to Portugal, and then Portugal to its neighbors.”
Per capita income in Portugal is about $22K, whereas in Spain it’s about $32K.
However, saying the difference is based on genetics is inane given that Spain and Portugal are nearly identical in genetics, and given that no autosomal studies have found greater admixture in the Portuguese than the Spanish.
Also it should be noted that Greece has a per capita income of about $34K, in spite of the same extremely flawed techniques purporting to show admixture in Portugal usually showing greater admixture in Greece.
It is true that Iberians have HLA markers in common with Berbers, but it’s important to understand that the Berbers are largely descended from Iberians and/or other Europeans who migrated into North Africa.
There’s isn’t a basis for saying the commonality isn’t due to gene flow from Iberia into Berbers, as opposed to from Berbers into Iberians.
(Also, unfortunately there haven’t yet been studies on the non-immunological autosomal dna of the Berbers, which is a great flaw in our knowledge given that immune system genes are subjected to germ environment specific selection effects, and that the similarity between Berbers and Iberians could thus look larger than it actually is due to the historical similarities in the germ environments of North Africa and Iberia.)
“I understand this, but check out the per capita figures.”
The intentional homicide rate in Portugal is lower than the intentional homicide rate in Belgium, France, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Finland, Latvia, Belarus, Hungary, Croatia, Russia, the United Kingdom, Romania, Bulgaria, and Moldova.
It’s only marginally higher than that in Spain (relative to which it‘s almost identical), Italy, Ireland, Denmark, Switzerland, Sweden, and Greece.
Anyway, just because in the specific area of Brazil mixing turned out to cause problems to economic and criminological performance doesn’t make these problems inherent to mixing.
If White gentiles interbred with Ashkenazi, for example, it would have the exact opposite effect to what was seen in Brazil.
Our IQ would increase, our crime rate would go down, and our incomes would go up.
The real problem with mixing isn’t that sometimes it can be dysgenic, but rather that it goes against racial preservation.
If the idea of a superior society is to be less like Brazil, then a very real argument could be made that we could improve America by killing everyone, including the White people, and replacing them with Japanese.
I’d still be against this, though, for reasons that would remain unchanged in the face of the argument that this action would certainly lower the American crime rate.
http://www.white-history.com/refuting_rm/3.html
Refuting Racial Myths on Negroid ancestry in Portugal
Parrott:
The critical factor is that many of the people in the movement are historical hobbyists, autistic types who understand the situation in purely statistical and factual terms,…?As the movement gathers momentum, those people will gradually disappear.
Walters:
If the A3P types gather momentum quickly and start winning elections for local office within ten years, there might be a noticeable shift. The “white movement” might become a mass movement, and the autistic intellectuals will indeed move on as you say.
If, on the other hand, the A3P types do not win any elections for ten years or more, the autistic intellectuals might be dead of old age before the momentum pushes them out. Presumably, if they have been very good, Revilo P. Oliver will be waiting to welcome them into the afterlife.
Brutus:
I hope you are not denigrating Revilo Oliver. … Oliver told and instructed many of the best men we have had what to do and how to best go about it. He made many suggestions, including methods and possible venues to propagate our mesage. His hand is present in many places.
Revilo P. Oliver was a brilliant and very successful intellectual; I am a much less noteworthy and much less successful intellectual. I did not intend to denigrate him, but even if one of my humble status were to do so, it would be as absurd as a professional wrestler claiming to be more fearsome than Charles Martel.
My point was that if the politically active folks deride the intellectual of today as autistic pedants, they probably would have likewise derided Oliver as autistic and pedantic. To the best of my knowledge, Oliver was pushed out of the John Birch Society by charismatic politicians who prioritized mass appeal over intellectualism; it seems to me that a similar marginalization might repeat itself again.
Brutus,
In short, I think you and Silver are skating around some thin ice and telling us it is thick.
Hang on a second. I think Randy and I might be talking about two different things.
I was primarily talking about southern Europe and the broader Mediterranean region (including Anatolia) and into the Caucasus and parts of southern Russia.
My point was that by WN standards those regions are technically “mixed race.” As I said (go back and read it, it’s right there in black and white), a substantial portion of the population in these regions is “white,” even by WN standards (even by nordicist standards) and a substantial part isn’t, and that that state of affairs is such a non-issue it’s very seldom even commented on. (Okay, they’re not setting the world on fire economically or technologically or what have you, but in terms of get-along-ishness they are doing very well, which is the point I was making.)
That was the first point. (And you go back and reread it to see the context in which it was raised.)
My second point was that co-operative, enjoyable multiracial working conditions exist at levels much lower than Silicon Valley-like “Smartmanistans.” And I said that with the proviso that in America (I’m not in America), where such a large proportion of the racial mix consists of virulently antiwhite niggers and hispano-mestizos, things may well be different (I don’t doubt they are).
As for Brazil, well, I didn’t mention anything about Brazil, but no, if you’re wondering, I certainly don’t consider it a model worthy of emulation.
Amerikaner and Matt Parrott,
I think you both make a plausible argument that a multi-cultural “Smartmanistan” type of arrangement is perhaps a better deal (and ultimately a potentially unsustainable one) for the elites than for the regular folks, or at least that a WN system as you envision it would be a better steward of the interests of all members.
As I’ve begun to learn more about racialism, a pattern seems to emerge wherein many or most racialists appear to endorse the idea that ethnic nationalism in general (and white nationalism in particular) is the best form of society as ordained by science. To believe otherwise is to either be ignorant or a malefactor.
I suppose my current belief is that White Nationalism has to be an arbitrary construct (which isn’t necessarily a bad thing), certainly compatible with our scientific knowledge of politics and race, but not one that is required by it.
Here’s an example of what I’m talking about:
The other day I listened to David Duke’s podcast from July 12th “The Honest Truth About race – Is Skin Color the Only Real Racial Difference?”(http://www.whitecivilrights.com/index_print.php?p=3891).
In his speech he lays out the case for race, but then also embeds a potentially troubling caveat. Duke’s main argument seems to be that the races are different, and should have the freedom to grow and develop in their own way and to their own potential.
Makes sense.
At one point he brings up the case of Czechoslovakia and how the Czechs and Slovaks are happier having the space to develop in their own way.
This raises the question of, “what is the minimum unit of harmonious ingroup?”. Czechs and Slovaks are not only both ethnically white, but they’re both “Western Slavs”. If the minimum unit of ingroup, where sustainable ethnic harmony exists, only emerges all the way down at the tribe level, then American White Nationalism shouldn’t really be feasible.
In a sense, David Duke somewhat disproves his own premise if one embraces the idea that WN is the scientific consequence of natural law. Using David Duke’s premise, there couldn’t be one American white ethnostate, but rather there would have to be hundreds.
I’m much more inclined to believe in Matt Parrott’s vision (in which I think he is offering an “instance” of unified White Nationalism in America that is compatible with our scientific understandings) rather than in David Duke’s (and many others) vision where White Nationalism is the ONLY conclusion you would come to if you’re being honest and have scientifically weighed the evidence.
Matt: I would suggest caution in using the Chinese as your example of cultures that are appropriately focused on race and ethnic preservation. Their government’s sole focus is to remain in power. Nationalism for them is just one tool in the kit, and their young and growing middle class is very western-oriented. For the most part, miscegenating with whites gains them increased social status.
Randy,
The shepherd has a natural right to fleece his sheep. The elites will always have it better than the folk. The poor will always be with us. The difference between China’s elites and America’s “Cosmic Elite” is that theirs are fleecing their flock, whereas ours are slaughtering their flock. Ideally, a folk will have the most benevolent elites possible, but the most critical consideration is whether their basic survival interests are aligned.
There are definitely some serious problems with China. I think you’ll enjoy some of John Derbyshire’s thoughts on China. He’s an intellectually honest race realist who has also succumbed to Yellow Fever.
http://www.johnderbyshire.com/Opinions/China/page.html
The difference is that China is able to face their (considerable) challenges as a people, while we have Toonces the Driving Cat at the wheel.
Maybe America’s something else — and when I consider the racial types and numbers of them involved, I’m inclined to believe it is — but such amicable relations are possible — and routine — at levels much lower than “Smartmanistan.” Certainly they are here where I live.
This isn’t to cheer-lead for such societal arrangements. Personally, I find them fantastically underwhelming, uninspiring, strained, forced, antiseptic. But you can’t proceed on a faulty understanding of what people perceive or experience in such conditions; and to deny that they’re ever tolerable or enjoyable can only continue to hobble racialism/WN’s attempts to broaden its reach. @Silver
Silverino,
Yes, don’t misunderstand what I am saying. I am not saying or at all implying that amicable multi-racial or multi-ethnic relations are impossible — or even in some ways ‘routine’ — without the affluence or the status of a Silicon Valley or some other area where there is an above-average concentration of wealth and status.
My primary point here is that it makes inter-racial and ethnic relationships merely easier, certainly easier than it does for the common folk, of whatever race or ethnic background, in their necessarily competitive search for jobs, resources and social status — which are becoming harder to secure the world over.
Actually, various ethnic groups can get along reasonably well, as you say Silver, even tolerably and enjoyably as you also say, particularly with the examples you often hold up of South-eastern Europe, the Balkans and the Caucuses (unless, of course, they are from a very different religion — as recent history has so amply demonstrated).
The difference here is that they often have to be from the same social backgrounds or, overall, share the same or similar socio-economic status. IOW, they cannot be at eachother’s throats having to compete for scarcer and scarcer resources.
I’m much more inclined to believe in Matt Parrott’s vision (in which I think he is offering an “instance” of unified White Nationalism in America that is compatible with our scientific understandings) rather than in David Duke’s (and many others) vision where White Nationalism is the ONLY conclusion you would come to if you’re being honest and have scientifically weighed the evidence. @Randy Garver
I completely agree here as well (and very well stated).
This raises the question of, “what is the minimum unit of harmonious ingroup?”. Czechs and Slovaks are not only both ethnically white, but they’re both “Western Slavs”. If the minimum unit of ingroup, where sustainable ethnic harmony exists, only emerges all the way down at the tribe level, then American White Nationalism shouldn’t really be feasible.
In a sense, David Duke somewhat disproves his own premise if one embraces the idea that WN is the scientific consequence of natural law. Using David Duke’s premise, there couldn’t be one American white ethnostate, but rather there would have to be hundreds.
True. I think the best arrangement would be an alliance of locally governed units, similar to the original setup of the US, where the federal government only had control of military defense of the borders and waters and a few other minimal tasks, while the day-to-day governing was done by state and local units and tailored to the people living there and their particular needs and desires. Likewise in Europe, the EU should not be anything more than a customs union.
“How ‘vital’ are the Portugese today, whether in their homeland or in Brazil?”
They’re plenty vital in Portugal, at least by European standards. For example, they’ve done a far better job of maintaining control over their own territory against invaders relative to a lot of Western Countries.
Per capita income is hardly the best measure of vitality. @Reginald
Reginald,
Good point that per capita income is not the ultimate measure of a country, or its people.
As the old saying goes, “money ain’t everything”.
“…Portugal’s security and peace indicators compare very favourably to other countries. According to the 2009 Global Peace Index rankings, Portugal is the 14th most peaceful country in the world.”
Next Silver will the lauding the wonderful multiracial, multicultural civility of College Campuses, which are also filled with smart people.
Corporate America, American higher education, the American Military, are all multicultural, multiracial experiments sustained by the constant application of “soft” totalitarian intimidation and brainwashing techniques.
Greg,
You claim we are perishing from “bad ideas.” This is partially true. Americans subscribe to a number of bad ideas that have diluted the strong racial consciousness that used to exist in this country. These are all well known.
Where did these bad ideas come from? Cultural anthropology, liberalism, communism, anti-racism, postmodernism, feminism, anarchism, expressive individualism, etc. If you trace their genealogy, most of them were imported from overseas in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. We can go back and pinpoint the approximate dates of infection.
A preexisting receptiveness to these bad ideas among Americans who wanted to ape fashionable European intellectual trends enabled them to take root on American soil and metastasize to the point they have reached today. The last thing we need to do right now is exacerbate the situation by importing still more bad ideas from overseas.
Your suggestion that we need “new ideas” is analogous to saying that my desktop which is infected by a computer virus needs another computer virus to counteract its malicious effect. We don’t need Savitri Devi and Guillaume Faye to offset John Locke and Jean-Paul Sartre.
Those “naive frontiersmen” conquered North America and created a race-based republic. Perhaps they were “dumb” and “thought small,” say, in terms of their own families and immediate self interest, but that is infinitely better than subscribing to fashionable intellectual garbage like postmodernism which is ruining this country.
What does Oswald Spengler have to teach us? We’re in the terminal phase of civilization. The “high culture” of the West has died. There is nothing we can do to change our circumstances. In other words, a formula for navel gazing, intellectual masturbation, parsing texts and doing nothing.
What about Friedrich Nietzsche? He was the one who set the twin wrecking balls of historicism and expressive individualism in motion. There is nothing in his writings about creating a racially based White ethnostate.
This whole obsession with defending whiteness and excluding non-Whites grew out of our own history and culture in interacting with non-Whites in North America. It would speak well of us to revisit the process by which we developed racial consciousness in the first place rather than rummaging through foreign texts looking for a rationalization of it that isn’t even there.
Randy,
As I’ve begun to learn more about racialism, a pattern seems to emerge wherein many or most racialists appear to endorse the idea that ethnic nationalism in general (and white nationalism in particular) is the best form of society as ordained by science. To believe otherwise is to either be ignorant or a malefactor.
That sums it up nicely. That’s what WNs mean when they proclaim, “We have the facts! The opposition refuses to debate us because they know they’ll lose!” As you’ve realized, that’s not true at all. “The facts” really only make the stupidest (or vilest), most commie-besotted versions of “liberalism” untenable; such politics could still be pursued, of course, only they would then fly in the face of what was generally accepted as “the truth.” The reality is that society could adjust — and adjust rather well — to the new facts without anything like a mass yearning for a white ethnostate.
There is another subset of WN that you might not be aware of that is overwhelmingly motivated by esthetics. These guys are simply revolted by the looks of non-whites.
Reading WN discussions, you’ve likely seen doubts expressed about the “whiteness” of some individual or another — he or she may look white, but beware, admixture lies within! Oh, the agony that ensues then; it’s a non-white piece of slime and, sheesh, that nose, or that brow ridge, or those cheeks, how didn’t I notice it the first time, and oh, for the love of God, get rid of it.
The fear, you see, is that introducing that thing into the gene pool, despite its deceptively white appearance, means (a) progeny that results from breeding with it, according to the workings of heredity, risks looking more obviously non-white, and (b) the odds of future Claudia Schiffers or similar embodiments of white perfection are now that much lower (and really, why bother living if you’re race isn’t forever trekking along the Upward Path?).
As you might have guessed, these folks don’t care a great deal about the lower echelons of their own kind. Though they deplore the practice (for the example it sets), they’re simultaneously encouraged by the dregs of their race going off with niggers etc. Whatever they are, “stewards” these people surely ain’t.
This raises the question of, “what is the minimum unit of harmonious ingroup?”. Czechs and Slovaks are not only both ethnically white, but they’re both “Western Slavs”. If the minimum unit of ingroup, where sustainable ethnic harmony exists, only emerges all the way down at the tribe level, then American White Nationalism shouldn’t really be feasible.
Right. And there are people making precisely that argument; they disdain “white nationalism” as mere “white multiculturalism” and announce that “whiteness” per se means nothing to them.
In a sense, David Duke somewhat disproves his own premise if one embraces the idea that WN is the scientific consequence of natural law. Using David Duke’s premise, there couldn’t be one American white ethnostate, but rather there would have to be hundreds.
Maybe not “hundreds,” but why couldn’t there be more than one? If WNs don’t insist on retaking the entire US territory (and apart from some livid holdouts they tend not to), then why on earth not? Why even “WN” and not simply “racialism,” which could obviously to a great many more people than merely whites (or those whose primary identity is “White”)?
I’m much more inclined to believe in Matt Parrott’s vision (in which I think he is offering an “instance” of unified White Nationalism in America that is compatible with our scientific understandings) rather than in David Duke’s (and many others) vision where White Nationalism is the ONLY conclusion you would come to if you’re being honest and have scientifically weighed the evidence.
There’s also the EGI argument (originated by Frank Salter). This claims that if you understand genetics you will be a racialist. Genetic interests are ultimate interests so you simply have to be a racialist. You must. You’re just not living correctly if you’re not. Your life’s a waste; you’re a waste. In fact, you’re also mendacious. Because EGI is the secret keystone of history. No one ever did or does anything in this world unless as some sort of attempt to expand his genetic interests. (R-i-i-i-ght. Sure.)
Greg Johnson,
Next Silver will the lauding the wonderful multiracial, multicultural civility of College Campuses, which are also filled with smart people.
Sure, Gregory. Right after I just described multiracial environs that are civil and genial as “uninspiring, underwhelming, strained, forced, antiseptic.” That can only mean I champion such stuff!
Does anyone reading this have any idea why Hunter Wallace is pretending to be this dumb and is attacking me and the “European idears” that interest me?
Does anyone reading this have any idea why Hunter Wallace is pretending to be this dumb and is attacking me and the “European idears” that interest me?
I suspect Hunter Wallace’s priority right now is practical, boots-on-the-ground action. His goals do not involve intellectualism. Thus he will act effectively if he purges his own character of any residual attachment to intellectual distractions.
I suspect Greg Johnson’s action goals right now are more like pen-to-the-paper, or chalk-to-the-blackboard, but not boots-on-the-ground. Intellectual action is still a kind of action, but don’t try telling that to someone who wants boots-on-the-ground.
I also suspect that Hunter Wallace will gather followers most effectively if he presents a public face that is determined, concentrated, and focussed. If Hunter Wallace derides Greg Johnson right now, there is a considerable chance that Hunter will gather action-oriented followers who will not get distracted by ideas.
The Internet can make friendships suitable for Internet interaction. If you need someone to play World Of Warcraft with, or if you need to exchange jpgs of kittens playing with yarn on a bulletin board, Internet correspondents are the best sort of friend.
If you need friends in your life, you need meatspace friends.
If you need loyal subordinates to undertake important tasks, you need people who have earned your trust – they don’t have to be personal friends. For example, when I want to research an issue in clinical medicine, I need a competent medical doctor – not a personal friend, not a meatspace friend.
Internet friends are not meatspace friends. Likewise, Internet enemies are not meatspace enemies.
Does anyone reading this have any idea why Hunter Wallace is pretending to be this dumb and is attacking me and the “European idears” that interest me?
Maybe he is doing an imitation of Jim Giles.
Jim Giles is someone who likes to pretend that he is just a poor hillbilly, even though he is obviously very smart.
Personally, I’m wary of over-intellectualism, both American and European. I think it is reassuring to see Hunter Wallace reject your essay about Spengler. He shouldn’t encourage you in that direction!
Greg,
If I were to take Oswald Spengler at his word, I would withdraw in seclusion to await the “Caesars” who will overthrow democracy in the terminal phase of Western civilization.
Historical determinism is a prescription for inaction and submission in the wake of all the outrages that are being committed against our people. Spengler is good example of the negative impact of popular intellectuals.
Armor,
On balance, I have concluded that most of these intellectuals have proven to be a bad influence on racial nationalism. Can you point out where I am going wrong?
P.S. The typical hillbilly in Mississippi has a better grasp on race than Europe’s brightest intellectuals.
I applaud Hunter’s road trips. I just don’t see why he goes online when he comes home and denigrates the efforts of others.
Silver,
I don’t know what your motives are, but I think your shtick ultimately amounts to an elaborate “concern troll”. Of course many of the people here overstate the racial case. This is the White racialist website. Of course many of the people here are stupid. All crowds of humans are loaded with stupid people. But you just keep carrying on about how there are overstatements and jackasses among us, as if that’s either our singular defect or that something can be done about it.
It’s possible to reel things back down to Earth without being such a downer and it’s possible to have an serious conversation while stupid people are barking about their monomaniacal bullshit and being vulgar.
Dr. Greg,
While I don’t go as far as Hunter does in condemning European intellectual traditions, I fully understand why he’s reacting as he is. How can you dedicate yourself to churning out anti-Christian, anti-American, and anti-rational material from some of the most eccentric minds in Europe, then be surprised when daily activists distance themselves from the work?
Spengler did have a defeatist perspective on Western Civilization and did have the kind of sloppy conception of racial thought that’s common among Continentals. You recently wrote an article that speculates on abandoning Whiteness altogether in pursuit of becoming elves. The article at the top of your site right now is on how Christianity’s repression of sexual permissiveness is dysgenic. That’s like a trifecta of offensiveness.
You’re an intellectual, and should keep following your heart and mind. But you really shouldn’t be all that surprised when people who are strategists and tacticians lose patience with your work and become openly cynical about its potential for adding value or resulting in the achievement of discrete quantifiable objectives.
Matt, maybe you’re right. Maybe Hunter thinks that there is a large number of simple frontiersmen out there who would rally to his standard and start massacring non-Whites like in the good old days — if only he first divested himself of any taint or suspicion of intellectualism, which rests entirely on a past association with yours truly, from whom he must therefore distance himself with his patently disingenuous posturing and sniping.
It could be true, but charity keeps me searching for a better explanation.
Whatever the motive, Hunter’s anti-innerleckshul turn has succeeding only in squandering his reputation as one of the bright young men of WN in the eyes of his most discerning and constructive readers.
Greg,
There might be more to this than I’m getting, but Hunter’s basic instincts are correct, here. This is an American movement, a contemporary American movement. It will rely on American symbols, themes, and ideals. I believe he overstates his case, and I’ve benefited quite a bit from perusing RadTrad and European New Right works. But we shouldn’t keep watering a dead tree.
Savitri Devi died childless and married to an Indian. Rene Guenon renounced the West altogether, converting to Islam and moving to Egypt. Spengler established an elaborate historiography with no mechanism that consigned the West to an inescapable death spiral. Hitler lost, his regime amounting to little more than a cult of personality that evaporated within months of his demise.
Rather than taking it personally, why don’t you help explain how your work is relevant to our work? That’s what would really make asses of us “Euro-skeptics”.
I’d hardly call Spengler sloppy, although I think he was using some erroneous data.
Everyone, including the diverse collection of folks calling themselves WN, approaches subjects of importance on their own level, thru their own filters. Some material was never meant for some people. I see the ‘must read’ lists of the more cerebral people and I think, “yeah, Spengler is a must read for me, but what about my grandfather? For Joe Sixpack?” etc.
A multiplicity of tailored approaches is the only way to reach any large amount of white people, and as long as the approaches are somewhat insulated from one another, we can produce a unity, instead of the constant infighting due to insults to people’s personal sensibilites (I’ve gone on the attack a few times over this).
Continental Intellectuals? Yes! Home grown historically American activism? Yes! Christian WN? Yes! Heathen WN? Yes! Atheist WN? Sure, why not? Working within the system? Yes. Absolute rejection of the system? Yes.
We don’t need to solve ALL of the world’s problems right away. Keep yer eyes on the prize right in front of us.
Matt,
Vlad is right. Whatever happened to all that talk on OD not so long ago about having a lot of different stands selling different flavors of WN to different people?
Whatever happened to that talk about “a chain of discursive spaces”? Did that just get chucked out the Overton Window?
There is not “one right way” to do this, and even if there were, we don’t know what it is yet. How do we find it? By letting a thousand flowers bloom.
I am going to keep doing what interests me, because that is what I do best. If others find it interesting and helpful, then great. If you find it offensive, then tune it out.
You guys pick your own audience and do whatever you need to reach them. But stay on message, and attack the enemy, not people on your own side.
Greg,
I jumped in midstream, and thought I could get an ideological debate about the applicability of European New Right ideals in the contemporary American context out of this. I didn’t realize what I was getting myself into. I’ve never proposed that you be obstructed or attacked, have done neither, and have expressed support for what you’re doing.
I did ask for you to explain how the work you’re doing is relevant to contemporary White Advocacy, because I’m starting to have doubts. But you’re right. You don’t have to justify yourself to me and we can both do our own thing. I was just asking.
I didn’t do anything to get all that smack-talkin’ diva static.
“Whatever the motive, Hunter’s anti-innerleckshul turn has succeeding only in squandering his reputation as one of the bright young men of WN in the eyes of his most discerning and constructive readers.”
Damning with extravagant praise.
Hunter Wallace has his point of view, and is youthfully passionate about it, but his daggers would be better placed elsewhere.
But stay on message, and attack the enemy, not people on your own side.
This is ironic coming from someone who routinely denigrates his own movement. How many times do I have to look at the front page of counter-currents.com to read about how “degenerate” or “immature” or “worthless” the White Nationalist movement is?
But whenever someone critiques one of the essays on your site you tremble in shock! “Disagree with moi?” you say. “Why can’t we all get along!”
It is rather strange to read white Americans (aka European Americans) denouncing Europe, their ancestral homeland. A tree without roots is bound to die.
Besides, most of the hardcore “Americanists” are miscegenationists anyway. They argue for a new miscegenated American race. (Almost all neocons are “Americanists,” as well as many on the left.)
First and foremoest, I’m a European American (a white man proud of his ancestry), not a worshiper of some abstract, ideological “Americanism,” which will drift more and more toward anti-occidentalism.
It’s ironic that some of the anti-Europeanism I read here is in many respects similar to the vehement anti-Europeanism of Leo Strauss or Howard Zinn.
Wolf,
White America is a European country. We don’t have to check back with Europe to shore up our bonafides. We’re every bit as European as Germany, Scotland, or Italy. We’re not inferiors. Europeans could learn as much from us (I speak for all the colonial nations) as we could from them. The “Americanism” being defended here isn’t abstract and ideological. It’s ethnonational. It’s not pro-miscegenation and is no more floating away from occidentalism than the rest of the “occident”.
Wolf,
Oh, snap. You just arbitrarily conflated something somebody said with something a Jew said. Jewish comedians are really big on irony (Seinfeld = Jew), so I believe you might be the one with some explaining to do.
I will say this, however:
Savitri Devi was an anti-occidental traitor. Not only did she disinherit her own western ancestry to pursue some macaca nonsense and adopt a macaca name (her real name being Maximine Julia Portas), but she is a miscegenist, married an indian, and produced macaca babies.
Read:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-467787/I-love-mixed-race-baby–does-feel-alien.html
.
Re: Soren
I rest my case:
Just a few days ago, you declared that racial preservation was degenerate because … White Nationalists didn’t have the vitality of a Star Trek convention and refused to evolve into elves from the Lord of the Rings.
Johnson: has succeeding only in squandering his reputation as one of the bright young men of WN in the eyes of his most discerning and constructive readers.
Wallace: Just a few days ago, you declared that racial preservation was degenerate because … White Nationalists didn’t have the vitality of a Star Trek convention and refused to evolve into elves from the Lord of the Rings.
Presumably, the implication is that the elf idea was so far out that Johnson squandered his reputation by suggesting that fantasy fanatics have vitality.
Take a look at some of the young people who are obsessed with fantasy.
http://uncontroversial.wordpress.com/2010/07/19/oorp-the-drama-begins/
The white race has no future without white babies. I don’t know how many of the whites reading this have children already; I know many of us don’t.
Women of childbearing age tend to choose their mates based on enthusiasm. Even monogamy and arranged marriages cannot guarantee the faithfulness of wives; if they are enthusiastic about adultery, it’s hard to stop them.
If, on the other hand, women can be made to feel enthusiastic about bearing white children, then any amount of silly pageantry is justified.
I think the men who advocate white rights are often attracted by challenge, hardship, stark odds. No man would trouble himself to preach heresy if there were no thrill of danger involved. We men are enthusiastic about gritting our teeth and growling at the world – and thus we often end up growling at our brothers and cousins. We may need to growl a bit less, and flatter a bit more, if we hope to see a new generation of whites.
Johnson’s “elf” theme is both sublime and ridiculous. It is sublime because the myth of elfland stirs a sense of reverence for the forests of Europe. It is ridiculous because it is ridicule. No one enjoys being ridiculed; Johnson was using harsh and sobering facts:
1- There are fewer white ethnic advocates than there are white Star Trek enthusiasts;
2- The white Star Trek enthusiasts breed more frequently than the white ethnic advocates.
I am childless and not as young as I used to be. Johnson’s criticism stings me deeply; it reminds me that I failed to persuade a white woman to have hope in my future, and thus to bear my children. Truth hurts.
Maybe if I had been less dignified, less pompous, less concerned with defying anything popular – maybe I would have children by now. Maybe my pride cost me my progeny.
I hope that younger white men successfully breed, under whatever circumstances are necessary. Even if it requires wearing an elf costume.
“Wolf,”
Savitri Devi did not “disinherit her own Western ancestry” in any way; she tried to help the West finds its way back to its origins.
She took an Aryan name, Savitri, and a title, Devi, befitting a woman of her station. Anyone with a cursory knowledge of Indo-Aryan history would know this.
Savitri Devi married Mukherji for political reasons, and the marriage was never consummated. Not only did she never bear children, but in all likelihood, she died a virgin. The post-war German authorities confirmed her virginity during a medical examination.
Savitri affirmed numerous times that because she never wished to have children, she never had sex. Her mother had great difficulty during childbirth, and Savitri was not expected to survive; I am sure that had a tremendous impact on her psyche throughout her life.
In your next post, you will either: A) Prove me wrong and validate your statements on Savitri through academic citation; or, B) You will apologise for calling Savitri Devi an “anti-occidental traitor” and denigrating her character out of ignorance.
I could simply delete your comment and ban you for being an ignorant asshole who defamed a great woman for no apparent reason, but I will give you a chance to make it right.
John,
A man who needs to be inspired by a mythic vision of his elf-like descendants to impregnate a woman has serious problems.
A man who needs to be inspired by a mythic vision of his elf-like descendants to impregnate a woman has serious problems.
Note that in my text, I said that the myths were primarily important to inspire the women. I’m not sure if you’re misreading my text, or if you’re jumping to conclusions from the photographs of my OORP project.
I generally think “The Spearhead” is trash, but it has at least one good writer, and he has written an important thought on women and revolutions.
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2010/07/19/women-civilizations-center-of-gravity/
for civilization to work, the feminine must accept the limits to autonomy placed upon it. But women must more than just participate, they must enthusiastically do so. For just as a mother is the center of the family, women are the center of a civilization, and where they go, the civilization goes. In other words, women are a civilization’s center of gravity, defined by Clausewitz as
the hub of all power and movement upon which everything depends
Clausewitz encouraged practitioners of war to attack the enemy’s center(s) of gravity, for attacks there will have disproportionate effects and may very well paralyze the enemy and his ability or will to resist.
With this women-are-society’s-center-of-gravity conceptualization in mind, we see this fact acknowledged and reinforced repeatedly throughout history. The first example I use in the Garden, where Lucifer, knowing that attempting to convince Adam to violate the Law would be futile, focused his efforts instead on the more vulnerable and more important Eve. Why more important? Well, Lucifer knew that if he went after Eve and succeeded, not only would he enjoy a higher probability of success, but that success would be magnified well beyond that had he attacked Adam and succeeded. For Eve had influence disproportionate to her station in the created order. Lucifer corrupted her, and she drug Adam, the head of the First Family, with her into the Fall.
The second example is far more recent, and is actually four: the leaders of Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Soviet Russia, and Maoist China all deliberately and successfully courted German, Italian, Russian, and Chinese women in their revolutions. For they knew that while some German, Italian, Russian, and Chinese men supported them, far more men opposed their authoritarian reforms. Yet by promising more power, influence, and authority to women in their future socialist utopias, these leaders surfed to power on the wave generated by Eve’s Curse.
That these four radical left wing dictators did so was no accident; in fact, they were simply following the Marxist playbook, which reads:
Anybody who knows anything of history knows that great social changes are impossible without the feminine ferment. Social progress can be measured exactly by the social position of the fair sex (the ugly ones included).
Thus history suggests that the key to any revolution isn’t us men. While we are important, and can bring a lot of force and manpower to bear, we require at least the grudging cooperation of the 51% majority, who, as mothers and wives, drag the main body of the civilization with them.
I’m a big fan of the sci-fi/fantasy/gamer genre, and I spent a lot of time in this subculture before the WN and related political activities began to suck up all my free time.
I don’t think it’s a good path to families/children though. I can honestly say this is the one genre which has noticeably less women in it than WN. Usually guys disappear when they get a girlfriend, and my married friends were in a constant tug of war with their wives over whether they’d be allowed out of the house for a couple evenings or so per month to do the sci-fi/fantasy stuff. Oddly enough, the only girl I ever met that was into the Star Trek stuff, I met off of StormFront.
It is a very good implicitly white hobby interest…but I don’t think WN has anything to gain by trying to adopt it in the way it was proposed in that article.
I regret casually discussing Greg’s essay on Spengler during a conversation with Hunter. I could tell immediately that I had made a mistake, as Hunter was chomping at the bit to write a response/refutation of Johnson’s piece before he had even read it, or allowed me to fully explain it.
Here’s my general impressions:
1) This whole thread is disheartening to casual onlookers and veterans alike. It implies some sort of duality between thought and action, when we are so clearly in need of both.
2) There is an increasing level of anti-European, anti-hieratic, and anti-Traditional rhetoric to be found here as of late. It is a disturbing trend.
3) I find it odd that all of this America vs. Europe discussion is taking place between two parties that agree that America is a lost cause, and a White ethnostate is needed if our race is to survive. That race is European.
H. Rock White said that most of us would be happy to go back to the period where we didn’t have to “press 2 for English.” The general picture he paints is similar to my childhood in 1980s Reagan America. I deeply disagree with this perspective, for two reasons:
a) History doesn’t work in reaction. We cannot roll the clock back to 18th century America, or even 1980s America, any more than we can roll it back to 1930s Germany or the Ghibelline Middle Ages.
b) We must be political soldiers, not politicians. Our job it to supplant the current Order, not modify it slightly so as to gain material concessions. An all-White America that was still spiritually and culturally bankrupt would appeal to me little more than contemporary America does. Though we cannot be transported back to the Ghibelline Middle Ages, we desperately require the sort of “Ghibelline Restoration” of which Evola spoke. The first step is finding our way back to our roots, and those roots are European.
In Covington’s novel, The Brigade, there is a scene in which an American officer has a run-in with an NVA Brigade Commander engaged in armed struggle against the United States government. At some point, the US officer sputters, “but you’re an American, too!” and the NVA Commander replies with something along the lines of: “I used to be, but I had to make a decision. I am a White man.”
We all have to make that decision. Are you an American, or a White man?
“Europa ist kein geographischer, sondern ein blutmäßig bedingter begriff.” – Adolf Hitler
(Europe is not a geographical term, but rather a concept defined by blood.)
Robert Campbell,
In fairness to Hunter, I think his position is that we don’t need anymore new ideas than the ones that [organically] came out of the American founding: liberty, republican governance, and whiteness. Why waste time on new ideas when we already know what worked in the past! All that really matters is the will and character to get er done.
Personally, I don’t think what’s holding this movement back is either a lack character or ideas. I am convinced that there’s plenty of both. It’s just that the American drama has to play itself out a little while longer before new political forms can have the opportunity to arise. When the time is right the leadership needed to make this happen will present itself organically, but not before then. Is it really all that surprising that intellectual types sense this before anyone else?
To everything there is a season, ours is coming.
we don’t need anymore new ideas than the ones that [organically] came out of the American founding: liberty, republican governance, and whiteness.
That’s a pretty good summary of my thoughts.
I know we can’t ‘turn back the clock’, but we should do everything we can to portray our movement as something which creates a better life for ordinary white people and their families, not as a radical upheaval. Also, we have lots of good examples from our past, even the recent past, that make better totems to relate to. As to the “Ghibelline Middle Ages”, that was a product of a time period in which nearly all economic activity was based on manor farms, and society has progressed so far beyond that point that a return is impossible. Instead of a few overlords and priests ruling over a population which is 95% farm laborers, now only 1-2% of the population is engaged in farm labor, and most people have to have some sort of education & job skills.
The bottom line: many of the people who have spent ten or twenty years entertaining every idea imaginable (what philosopher haven’t they read?), who are completely on board insofar as creating a White ethnostate goes, won’t stand up for those ideas in the real world.
Thus, we are having this discussion about how more ideas and more talk is needed, as if reading the next Oswald Spengler or Norman Lowell book will prompt them to do anything other than read the next book and post the next comment about it on the internet.
I’m just wondering: what book or what idea will finally prompt people who believe in White Nationalism to act? I pointed out that people who didn’t read a single book – like the Jamestown colonists or Yorktown soldiers – built colonies in hostile Indian territory, won American independence, and then conquered a continent.
I think this is a legitimate point worthy of consideration. I’m enjoying this debate. I think we need to have this discussion.
White Nationalists should have children. Point granted.
What do you need to do to have children? All you have to do is be a man, bed a woman, and impregnate her. It is not hard.
White Nationalists should have children. Point granted.
What do you need to do to have children? All you have to do is be a man, bed a woman, and impregnate her. It is not hard.
Sure, then cough up the money and resources to meaningfully support and raise them.
Not the easiest objective to accomplish in the teeth of a recession and, especially, at the heights of anti-White male job and employment discrimination.
Quit complaining.
My great grandparents had over half a dozen children with nothing like the income and modern conveniences that Whites enjoy today.
Robert Campbell,
Fact remains that Savitri Devi married a macaca. You justify it for “political reasons”? Give me a break. I suppose every blonde marrying a black NFL player can justify it by political / economic reasons.