Most Americans will have trouble feeding themselves

The below essay, “US, SU: Same Scenario?” is the thirteenth essay of Michael O’Meara’s book Toward the White Republic, available from Counter-Currents Publishing here.





Book review
of Dmitry Orlov’s

Reinventing Collapse: The Soviet Example and American Prospects (Gabriola Island, Canada: New Society Publishers, 2008)


Despairing of my people’s passivity, I have often thought the collapse of the United States might be the one thing to turn them against the system that seeks their destruction.

This “catastrophist” perspective is, admittedly, a strategy of desperation. For collapse (what Joseph Tainter calls a “recurrent feature of human societies”) may delegitimize the existing system and make whites more receptive to their racial/national interests, but, in a worst case scenario, it could pose problems even more threatening than those of the last 60 years.

The literature of collapse is consequently of the utmost relevance, especially now that the “American Century” seems to be nearing its inglorious end.

Of the numerous works on fallen civilizations, perhaps the most pertinent are, for obvious reasons, those related to the Soviet collapse of 1991. Hence the propitiousness of Orlov’s recently published work.

A computer engineer by training, Orlov and his Russian Jewish family emigrated to the US in the 1970s. He has since maintained ties with the land of his birth, having returned during those periods leading up to, traversing, and following the Soviet collapse. Writing from a radical ecological perspective critical of industrial civilization (which he implicitly—Hebraically?—associates with white civilization), Orlov suggests what collapse entailed in the SU and why the US is no less a candidate.

His book, though, is no work of scholarship.

“I am not,” he writes, “an expert or a scholar or an activist. I am more of an eyewitness. I watched the Soviet Union collapse and this has given me the necessary insight to describe what the American collapse will look like” (p. vii).

He accordingly spends little time sketching the big picture—the structural forces driving the collapse—and, instead, concentrates on its “micro-scale” processes and experiences. This makes his book a “personal” work, without claim to scientific authority, but nevertheless one that is very readable and informed by the all-important “human” dimension of collapse.

Despite their different methods and styles, Orlov sees the two 20th-century superpowers as “antipodes” of the same techno-economic civilization committed to social management, economic growth, material accumulation, world domination, and the realization of the Enlightenment vision of a totally rationalized world.

As such, Orlov argues that the US and the SU both sought a better life through science, approaching every human problem in terms of a technical fix. They both were militaristic, imperialistic powers who, through direct or proxy wars, made a mess of the international arena and, though Orlov doesn’t mention it, introduced reforms in the Third World that has caused it to grow out of control; they both devoted endless fanfare to celebrating their democratic, egalitarian institutions, however fraudulent; both assaulted popular beliefs and values in the name of a higher rationality, discouraged traditional social relationships, created meaningless, uncreative forms of work, exalted materialist values over others, repressed dissent, recruited corrupt, venal elites—and, most seriously, cared little or nothing about the white, or European, race, though Orlov doesn’t actually think this. It might be added, and this too isn’t in Orlov, that the US and the SU both were social experiments that favored Jews, making them, and their values, dominant.

The list of similarities goes on. But the basic point—that the US and the SU were techno-economic civilizations devoted to roughly analogous worldviews at odds with nature and the nature of ourselves—seems rather indisputable. As such, one civilizational model collapsed, and the other, for roughly similar reasons, now faces the prospect of a similar collapse.

Orlov gives no credence to the Reaganesque bombast that the United States defeated the Soviet Union in the Cold War. He argues that its collapse had little to do with ideology and even less with American influence. Instead, he attributes it to the SU’s “chronic underperforming economy, coupled with record levels of military expenditure, trade deficit and foreign debt” (p. 8). These economic problems made it increasingly difficult for “average Russians” to get by.

When Soviet reformers under Mikhail Gorbachev at last attempted to fix the centrally-planned stagnation, they couldn’t. This failure, combined with military humiliation in Afghanistan and the nuclear disaster at Chernobyl, so discredited the Soviet state that it imploded.

Given that Orlov’s book appeared before the US financial meltdown of September 2008, it looks mainly at those structural weaknesses in the US economy that most resemble those of the former SU—rather than at that institutionalized system of fraud responsible for pulling off one of the great historical swindles.

Stressing the inherent flaws in the US economy and noting that it has taken a couple of decades for the US to catch up to the SU, he suggests that the US may soon face a similar fate.

Like many ecologists, he rejects the facile conviction that modern society is exempt from the rise-and-fall cycles characteristic of pre-industrial societies or that present rates of economic and population growth can continue indefinitely.

The United States, he sees, is especially vulnerable to collapse, due to the petroleum basis of its economy. He points out that the US, with its “energy-intensive model of empire,” is more dependent on cheap oil than any other industrial economy, that its crude oil production “peaked” in 1970, and that three-quarters of its energy is now imported.

Any rise in oil prices will consequently be paid for in declining economic growth and higher food prices (agriculture being petroleum-intensive). Once the era of cheap energy comes to an end (sometime supposedly past its peak), world economies will be forced to undergo changes as significant as those that accompanied the onset of industrialization. This will lead to further decline and ultimately to collapse—which Orlov, citing the archdruid John Michael Greer, defines as that condition whereby “production fails to meet maintenance requirements for existing capital” (p. 2). That is, when the declining economic system starts “consuming” its infrastructure (cannibalizing itself, in effect) to compensate for declining incomes, it will simply hasten the inevitability of its demise.

But however central, energy is only one of the problems that Orlov, peak-oilist that he is, considers.

Because the US has outsourced most of its manufacture overseas, no longer produces the high technology on which it depends, and relies on imports for most of its basic needs, it has incurred an enormous trade imbalance, sustained by massive borrowing in foreign money markets. (For different reasons the SU acquired massive trade imbalances and debt in the 1980s.)

The problems created by America’s increased energy costs and the financialization of its economy have been compounded by a runaway military budget, a debt pyramid that grows at an exponential rate, and the decline of its overseas empire and “tribute economy.” Combined with imperial disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan, a growing international reputation for incompetence and corruption, violent changes in weather patterns (which produce killer hurricanes, like Katrina, having a system-disrupting potential), and the impending breakdown of neglected infrastructure (bridges, levees, poisoned water tables, etc.), these factors suggest that the US might eventually follow the SU into the dustbin of history.

The federal government and “the self-enriching political elites” that feed off it have, moreover, a vested interest in “perpetual growth” and imperial overreach, which means they can’t be expected to do anything constructive to stave off the impending collapse. As the economy begins to decline, tax revenues too will decline and public debt grow.

The only solution the elites have come up with to address the state’s impending fiscal crisis, thus far, is to crank up the printing presses and introduce more worthless paper into the market.

Orlov’s explanation of the Soviet failure and his prediction of an impending American collapse, given the impressionistic nature of his work, should, of course, be taken as merely suggestive, though economic contraction, declining energy availability, and increased political turmoil already loom on the horizon.

His work, moreover, is short on the specifics of collapse, he neglects any consideration of collapse as a “political process,” and he ignores important questions as to how and in what manner collapse occurred (in the SU) and will occur (in the US). It’s also not evident if an American economic collapse will mirror the suddenness of the Soviet collapse (which was historically unprecedented) or if, like more traditional cases, it will be stretched out over decades.

Qualitatively more persuasive, though, is Orlov’s claim that the Soviet Union was better situated than the United States to endure and recover from a political-economic breakdown.

In his view, Americans see their “spendthrift debtor nation” as a “land of free ice cream and perpetual sunshine” (p. 16). Never having experienced invasion, world war, famine, or bloody dictatorship, it’s hard for them to imagine a future unlike their past. More than Russians, Americans have been severed from their past and redesigned as gratification-oriented consumers whose defining character is materialist rather than ethnic, historical, or cultural. They also lack the psychology of resilience “bred” into the long-suffering Russians. Finally, they are more ideologically deluded by the system’s pretenses, just as they are more integrated into its increasingly dysfunctional institutions.

Born of a less happy, but more bona fide nation, Soviet Russians put greater emphasis on individual achievement and recognition than on economic success. Money and materialist designations didn’t play quite the same role in their lives as they do in the US, for their primary needs—work, housing, basic services—were essentially provided by their collectivized economy and the lifestyle consumption native to the American economy wasn’t an option. When the political system stopped functioning and the formal economy suffered its knockout blow, there simply wasn’t the moral and social devastation that is likely to affect Americans.

The SU was also favored in terms of food and shelter. Most Soviet housing was owned by the state. Though “drab and soulless,” it was well-built, insulated, and designed to last. Almost all housing was surrounded by public lands on which people kept kitchen gardens. Prior to the collapse, nearly 90 percent of the country’s domestic food supply came from these kitchen gardens and other individual plots, for Communism had turned Russian agriculture, once Europe’s breadbasket, into a basket case.

The Soviet regime also had a phobia of food riots and virtually every city stored large grain surpluses for emergencies. This made the Soviet-style food system almost immune to breakdown. After the collapse, most people were thus able to keep a roof over their heads and to provide themselves with food. All Soviet utilities, such as heat, running water, electricity, and garbage removal, were also public and could be counted on even after the dissolution of the central state. Above all, Russian housing was overwhelmingly urban, situated near the country’s extensive public transportation network, which continued to operate.

This will not be the case in the US, whether it undergoes a sudden Soviet-style collapse or if it should, as is more likely, experience a extended period of decline.

Most Americans, who don’t own their homes, will in either case face foreclosure, eviction, and homelessness.

They will also have trouble feeding themselves, once the shelves of their suburban supermarkets, stocked by just-in-time deliveries, are emptied.

Because the entire country is built around the auto—housing, shopping, work are virtually inaccessible without it—when the economy bottoms out and energy costs become prohibitive, this car dependency will prove catastrophic. Even in the oil-rich Soviet Union, there were gasoline shortages and severe rationing.

Without significant domestic supplies of gas and without spare parts for their foreign-built autos, suburban Americans will find themselves stranded.

Orlov suspects there will be a mass exodus from distant suburbs, as people are forced to relocate to centers whose supply and distribution networks remain operative. If this should occur, the world will shrink to areas that can be covered on foot or bike, long distance and global trade will be drastically curtailed, and the key principles of globalization will become totally untenable. More generally, “the world” will become “the local” and self-sufficiency the supreme virtue.

Consumerism will then become a thing of the past. Though the Soviet economy was notorious in its neglect of consumer goods, it nevertheless made things, with some conspicuous exceptions, to last. American goods, by contrast, are produced with artificially short replacement cycles and often in plastic, which means that once the container ships stop arriving at US ports many of the consumer items that have become essential will disappear, not to be replaced.

The greater prosperity and materialism of American life also means that things most of the world considers luxuries—cars, central heating, refrigeration, flush toilets, cell phones, packaged and processed foods, washing machines and kitchen appliances—have become necessities; their disappearance will be felt more intensely than in the Soviet system of socialized poverty.

An American collapse (or decline) is likely, then, to entail shortages of food, fuel, and countless consumer items, combined with outages of electricity, gas, and water; breakdowns in transportation systems and other infrastructure, including public health; widespread shutdowns and mass layoffs; all accompanied by confusion, despair, and perhaps violence.

Society as a whole will then be forced back to a less complex mode of operation; centralized forms of control will wane; things will suddenly become “smaller, simpler, less stratified, and less socially differentiated”; regions and communities will assume a greater centrality of tasks. Whether there will ensue a Hobbesian “war of all against all” is anyone’s guess.

As the old economy begins disintegrating, old forms of capital (cash, stocks, bonds) will progressively lose their value. Trucking and airplane fleets deprived of fuel will end up as scrap. Scientific and industrial equipment may be exported as forms of exchange, along with antiques, jewelry, and art objects. Numerous jobs—cable installers, lawyers, sales representatives, plastic surgeons, store clerks, stockbrokers—will become superfluous.

Given both the social and economic dislocation this will set off, law enforcement will probably be overwhelmed, replaced in part by private security and neighborhood defense units. Many laws will be ignored. Established authorities, no longer able to ensure the security of its citizens, will almost certainly cease commanding respect and new power structures may arise. Organized criminals, gangs, former cops, and military contractors will find new employment or self-employment. (This will be a good time to be in a Private Military Company.)

As the established market breaks down, an informal economy will likely replace it—an economy that largely revolves around the liquidation and recycling of the old economy and is based on “direct access to needed resources or the threat of force, rather than on actual ownership or legal authority” (p. 61).

As in Russia, we’ll probably see old people in open air flea markets selling off their treasured possessions, middle-class people rummaging through trash, the few remaining stores under heavy security.

All this will happen to a people not only psychologically unprepared for social upheaval, but ill-suited to the harsh realities it’ll bring. Americans, in fact, have lived so long with a radical disconnect between their “culturally acceptable beliefs” and their personal experiences that they are already afflicted with various mental diseases, evident in the tens of millions of anti-depressant and mood-altering drugs they daily consume. Collapse will send a great many of them over the edge—into new fantasized stages of denial or, perhaps, into a millennial “end times” revival.

The good news is that whites will also become increasingly unsupportive of a regime that no longer delivers the goods. Indeed, because the legitimacy of America’s managerial/ therapeutic regime is so closely linked to economic well-being, the latter’s breakdown will likely also either bring down the state or “hollow” it out. But whatever happens, the fall of the American system, based on a highly controlled system of “communications” and programmed consumption (i.e., on packaged goods and packaged lives), is going to lead not to the rapture, but to a very rude awakening.

This is worrisome to the degree that the most vulnerable to collapse, besides the “couch potatoes” spawned by our “prosthetic society,” are whites. For they are the most integrated into the existing system, they are the most deluded by the ideology of the American Dream (which holds that if you work hard and play by the rules, you will succeed), they are the most shorn of their former identities, culture, and communities (which assume a primary importance in times of crisis), and they lack any consciousness of being a people, based on a specific stock with a specific culture, and thus lack any consciousness of why they should act cohesively as a people.

However, once whites cease being sheltered in the bubbles of their cars or in their cubicle jobs, they will have no choice but to deal face-to-face with blacks, Mexicans, turbaned Sikhs, and the other exotic fauna that now cover their land. At this point, they may discover that a nation is not a “racial ragbag,” but a community based on a “consciousness of kind”—i.e., on a consciousness of being related in blood and spirit, of belonging to a people with a shared ancestry and a common culture.

The ensuing anarchy might similarly provoke conflict along ethnoracial lines, exacerbated by high gun ownership on both sides, that could conceivably lead to violent clashes and perhaps forms of ethnic cleansing.

Such conflict will have a far greater role to play here than it did in ethnically homogenous Russia, where communal relations remained civil, if not amicable (except in respect to Jews and other non-Russian minorities).

If American whites should remain unconscious of who they are as a people, they will almost certainly become victimized by the higher cohesion and consciousness of non-whites, whose ethnic identity, family ties, and cultural motivations are both more primitive and more powerful than theirs. The big question, then, is whether whites will passively succumb to black and brown predators, like sheep before the slaughter, or if, in an awakening, they’ll join with other whites to fight back. (I’m betting it won’t take long before they realize that it’s a matter of “us or them.”)

Relatedly, successful, middle-aged white men will be especially prone to nervous breakdown and depression—as the career, savings, and property they spent a lifetime pursuing suddenly go down the drain. Suicide, emotional paralysis, drink, and drugs will strike them at higher rates than other sectors of the population. Their fragility will be further compounded by the fact that their work experiences leave them totally unqualified for employment in a collapsed economy. Concentrated more in business, management, communications, law, sales, and information processing, they will find that non-white immigrants with practical skills as carpenters, mechanics, and general laborers are better situated to take advantage of the remaining job opportunities.

At the same time, as single households and nuclear families prove to be unviable, whites will find that extended families and friends are their most valuable assets.

The Russian family wasn’t much healthier than the American family, but economic conditions and housing shortages before the collapse helped keep marriages together, with three generations often sharing the same dwelling. And like most people worldwide, Russians also tended to live in the same locale all their lives. As a result, they had extended family ties and knew the people among whom they lived, both of which enhanced their survivability.

American whites lack these extended networks, and this is going to affect their adaptability in a broken world. To survive, they will have to rediscover the meaning of community and revive those organizations and activities that were once a mainstay of American civil society. In making the transition to a Third World lifestyle, whites then will either have to rediscover their own traditions or else revert to the sort of practices common to non-whites.

It took Russia only a decade to recover from its collapse and regain pre-collapse economic levels. This relatively speedy recovery was due to the individual Russian’s ability to adapt to crisis conditions and to the country’s vast oil reserves, which enabled their economy to bounce back relatively quickly, once world gas prices revived.

The US is not so well-situated. It will take longer to recover from whatever collapse brings, and it’s likely there will be no “recovery” from the decline of its techno-economic civilization (given the inevitable rise of energy costs and the unfeasibility of a globalized economy based on cheap energy). There’s also no single figure in the US governing elite capable of emulating the nationalist-minded Vladimir Putin, who prevented the oligarchs from turning post-collapse Russia into a colony of the world’s financial system.

But all’s not doom and gloom in this scenario. The crash, if and when it comes, will help whites shed their liberal illusions, perhaps lead them to discover what is most important in life, and, in the best of all possible worlds, prompt them to reestablish the racial-nationalist ties that once made them a great, enterprising people.

Of course, it would have been better if they hadn’t screwed around for 60 years, leaving it until the very last possible moment to recoup the Aryan qualities that will enable them to overcome the coming dark age, but better at 11:59 p.m. than never at all.

In this pre-collapse interlude, before the fall, nothing can be done to halt the inevitable or mitigate the immitigable. We are facing, in America’s world decline, not a solvable problem, but an unavoidable predicament that promises to rip apart the illusions that have animated American life for at least the last two generations—especially the illusion that unlimited growth and limitless consumption are possible in a world of finite resources.

We have, moreover, absolutely no control over what is about to happen: All our efforts would be like “wiggling our toes at a tsunami.” The only certainty now is that the process of decline has begun.

Worse, there are no oppositional parties, political formations, or extraparliamentary forces representing white interests to lead them, once the smoke clears. The impending crisis—this make or break time—comes thus at a relatively inopportune moment.

However, as individuals and, more importantly, as European Americans concerned with their people’s fate, they still have time—a civilization rarely collapses all at once, as Orlov and survivalists fantasize, but rather gradually, often over the stretch of decades—to turn inward to prepare themselves mentally for the looming economic breakdown and, as they do, to start turning outward to develop those “resilient communities” of friends, family, and fellow tribesmen, who, when the moment strikes, might not only help them survive—but perhaps also prompt them to start thinking about what should succeed the failed United States.

Quotable quotes (Letter W)

One supreme fact which I have discovered is that it is not willpower, but fantasy and imagination that creates. Imagination is the creative force. Imagination creates reality.

—Richard Wagner

Published in: on November 30, 2011 at 2:21 pm  Leave a Comment  

Let’s prepare a new Declaration of Independence

The 5,000-word article “2009: Crisis or Opportunity?,” the twelfth essay in Michael O’Meara’s book Toward the White Republic, is available from Counter-Currents Publishing here. I’ve edited it down to less than 3,000 words:



In the last two years, one crisis has followed another. First there was a housing mortgage crisis, then a liquidity crisis that led to a banking crisis, then a dollar crisis, then a credit crisis, then a geopolitical crisis, then an energy crisis, then a crisis of consumer confidence, and finally a political crisis at the highest level of the state, involving a crisis of the spirit which brought a negro to power—a negro symbolizing everything against which the American originally defined himself, and thus symbolizing the destruction of America’s historic identity. The burning question today is: are these cascading crises “conjunctural” (i.e., due to a combination of circumstances) or are they “structural” (inherent to the system’s nature)? If the latter, then the “American System,” which has governed the world since 1945 at the expense of its white population, faces a systemic breakdown, whose implications are potentially catastrophic. If only conjunctural, the news is still good, for it cannot but highlight the system’s anti-white nature, of which most whites still unfortunately remain clueless.

A crisis is a turning point, “a stage in a sequence of events at which the trend of all future events, especially for better or worse, is determined.” Though most commentators have emphasized the economic nature of the crisis, almost all recognize its system-disrupting potential. Hence the current obsession with the Great Depression of the Thirties and, in more radical quarters, the Soviet crisis of 1985, which brought Mikhail Gorbachev to power. A crisis, then, can be seen as the prelude to a historical transformation.

Though time alone will tell what the exact nature of this transformation will entail, it is nevertheless likely to undermine the legitimacy of the established powers and imperil the well-being of the middle class, thus advancing the cause of the white-nationalist ethnostate. Indeed, given the absence of an organizational structure and a popular following in the real world, the white nationalist project is predicated on just such a crisis—for it’s the one thing that offers our people a possible alternative to their programmed extinction.


1. The Crisis

A great many white Americans think theirs is the world’s preeminent country, though they know almost nothing about it and less about “the rest of the world.” Compared to the black and brown nations of the Third World, America, of course, is a paradise (even if most whites are lonely, isolated, and lacking any sense of who they are as a people). But compared to Western and Central Europe, or to Japan, Hong Kong, and certain of the other Asian Tigers, it more and more shapes up badly.

The great industries that once made America the world’s foremost economic power and provided working people a decent standard of living have been shipped overseas, along with the technologies and know-how that made them such powerhouses. Before the crisis, the economy was in fundamental disequilibrium, based on consumption rather than production, with consumer spending making up more than 70 percent of the GNP. Since the crisis, it has been turned topsy: the banking system, the bedrock of US capitalism, has failed, wholesale markets have frozen, the entire regulatory system is in a shambles, and consumer confidence is at its lowest point in history.

Against this backdrop of decline and looming disaster, the dominant mantra, endlessly echoed by the media, remains to “consume”—to rack up those credit card purchases that keep the banking/credit/ financial industries afloat—even though there’s nothing Americans produce or earn any longer to pay their debts. It seems poetically just that the country’s principal export is now the junk culture fabricated in Hollywood, a “culture” which celebrates behaviors and values historically considered pathological.

The country’s compromising dependence on exterior forces is compounded by the “Ponzi” or “pyramid” dynamics of the US financial sector, based on speculative bubbles that create a false prosperity; by debt-ridden, mismanaged, and often unaccountable corporations run by “Wall Street con men, hedge fund nabobs, and casino capitalists” unconcerned with taking “outrageous risks with other people’s money”; and by government policies (shaped by special interest groups) that redistribute assets from competent people to incompetents (particularly minorities that sponge off the public in the form of welfare, subprime lending, “positive” discrimination, and a host of other racial privileges).

To pay the interest on its spiraling debt, the country in the last decade has had to borrow two to three billion dollars a day from foreigners, mainly Chinese and Japanese, who are acquiring in the process ownership to wide swaths of the economy, while American speculators have racked up vast (and, as it turns out, largely meaningless) ciphers of wealth in cyberspace. Though the United States has never owed so much money to the rest of the world, its financial and political elites, addicted to fiat money, continue to believe they can expand the debt indefinitely.

America’s “human capital,” evident in the darkening of its populace, is also in conspicuous decline. Literacy rates are among the lowest in the industrial world; its once prestigious graduate schools of science and engineering are filled mainly with foreigners; its public schools are concerned less and less with mastering the rudiments of reading and writing than with dispensing contraceptives to fourteen year-olds and preventing the use of hand guns on school premises; the population as a whole is socially balkanized; its incarceration rate is the highest in the world; and its spirit, culture, and understanding is increasingly “McDonaldized.”

But perhaps of greatest consequence, the dollar is starting to lose its status as the world’s reserve currency—which means no more free credit and no more free rides. The United States will now have to pay normal market price for the funds it borrows abroad, and it can expect a sharp devaluation of its currency, as foreign investors unload their US dollar assets. Some commentators have gone so far as to claim that the dollar’s demise is imminent. But whatever happens, it seems safe to conclude that the fat times we have known are not coming back. Because these economic problems bear directly on the country’s political and social order, both American and foreign academics, some with distinguished credentials, have begun predicting “an economic and moral collapse [which] will trigger a civil war and the eventual breakup of the United States.”

What’s especially revealing in the recent spate of doom-and-gloom predictions about America’s future is the expectation, among not a few establishment authorities, that the crisis could—perhaps won’t, but might—lead to violent class struggle, military dictatorship, or even social revolution. This is unprecedented.

Against those who confuse the state with the nation, it needs stressing that the American System responsible for the crisis is not, and never has been, a national-state system committed to the defense and well-being of the people it represents. Its principal function has instead always been to defend those liberal democratic practices that facilitate market transactions. Uncommitted to the embryonic white nation that made up the American people prior to 1965 (a nation is not founded in 400 years, especially a nation based on such divergent European stocks as the United States), the ruling liberal elites have been free to pursue whatever policies foster their specific institutional interests or those of the dominant economic interests, while policies favoring the country’s white majority have only rarely been adopted and then usually in the form of electoral bribes. Indeed, the very notion of European America is an offense to these elites, who see the nation not as an organic body, but as a great market made up of competing individuals, whose interests are primarily economic, not social, racial, or national.

If white Americans had but a modicum of political savvy, they would have long ago realized that a state which does not serve them as a people has no right to govern and, in fact, is their enemy. The system’s folly, whose ramifications are going to be paid for with a good deal of popular misery, assumed fantastic—and, as it turns out, unbearable—proportions under the former Bush Administration. Thus it was that the neo-liberal, globalist tenets, which ideologically undergird the American System and reduce every question to a matter of individual economic interest, were emboldened under Bush’s neocon cabal by the boundless vanity of its Judeo-Evangelical “faith-based community”—which held that anything the American state does is right, that the United States always triumphs in the end, and that, contrary to traditional Christian stricture, the United States pursues God’s purpose in the world. Like the left, whose ideology leaves it unable to accept the realities of race, sex, and sexual orientation, Washington for the last eight years has been unable to distinguish between fact and fantasy, as it chases its various ideological chimeras. All the while, aliens, at the top and at the bottom of the American polity, were allowed the full run of things—from Jews dictating foreign policy that had nothing to do with the national interest, to Mexicans challenging American sovereignty on American streets.

When George W. was asked in his last press conferences who should be held accountable for the present economic disaster, he answered that no one person or group was actually responsible. “The whole system,” he said, “became inebriated.” To the degree the crisis is systemic, he, better than most, has designated the real culprit. But what he failed to mention is that the system wasn’t just temporarily inebriated: it has been so from the start. And like the mind-numbing incoherence of any serious drunk, the destabilizing, destructuring, and disordering power of this well-oiled system—despite the wealth and prosperity it has created for some—is about to provoke the most massive civilizational hangover in history.


2. The man of destiny

There’s been no better example of the bankruptcy of America’s liberal ideological system than the presidency of George W. Bush (whose only brush with Nemesis thus far has been dodging Muntader alZaidi’s shoe). That this third-rate individual, lacking an understanding of the most basic things, including English syntax, was put at the helm of the most powerful state in history unambivalently testifies to the system’s unfathomable corruption. Obama’s programmed election was specifically designed to restore something of the power squandered by the Bush Administration. In the highest reaches of the American establishment (and this is evident less in written documents than in the innuendoes and asides of its representatives), it became apparent in the last year or so that a restoration of American power and prestige in the world would require a makeover of unprecedented proportions. Hillary, who was previously the leading establishment candidate, was thus abandoned, for, besides being white, she was simply too closely associated with the establishment to create the impression of a major turn-around in American politics.

Hence, the scheduled entrance of the dusky knight, who was provided the money, the advisers, and the media frenzy to make his candidacy a shoo-in. This “47-year old black man with a political resume as ephemeral as a Mets pennant drive and a governing philosophy as dubious as Paris Hilton’s choice of boy friends” has not disappointed his handlers, for he was an ideal candidate. Given his race and undistinguished political profile, he possessed the seemingly “populist” credentials to appeal to an electorate fed up with Washington’s neocon mania; he spoke a recognizable form of English, dressed respectably, and avoided public displays of negro behavior; but, above all, he (or his advisers) knew how to appeal to TV-educated youth, who saw his campaign as another Great Awakening (with “racism” replacing the older Calvinist notion of sin).

It’s questionable, though, if the new administration has the capacity to lead. For those who care to see, scandal and fraud lurk behind every facet of Obama’s media-constructed image. His past has been carefully erased from the public record; his numerous, compromising ties to the big New York banks, the major foundations, black liberation theology, Chicago crime, and K Street have all been ignored by the controlled media; he may not even be a native-born American and thus not constitutionally eligible to be president. This cover-up won’t last. The strident anti-white racism of his wife, as well as his bonds to the nation’s financial oligarchy, will also eventually surface. Given the nature of the economy, he probably won’t even be able to deliver the goods to the black masses, who see him as a cargo-cult Messiah, and this will undoubtedly become a source of further unrest. But most of all, this frontman of the elites is thick with the Jews, whose wealth and power controls the Democratic party (even more than that of the neocon-led Republicans) and whose interests, as already evident, will be foremost among his administration’s concerns. It’s hardly coincidental that his chief-of-staff, Rahm Emanuel, is the son an Irgun terrorist and is himself a rabid Zionist; and that the prominent Jews Obama has delegated to resolve the crisis (Robert Rubin, Larry Summers, Tim Geithner, etc.) “represent political duplicity and malfeasance on a grand scale.” Obama, in fact, is such a creature of Jewish interests that some have begun to call him “the first Jewish president.” The incompetence, corruption, and Jewish jingoism already evident in the new administration suggests, moreover, that the former neocon regime was less responsible for the present disaster than the system itself. Obama, Bush—black hustler, bungling cowboy—it doesn’t seem to matter who occupies the office. It’s the system that rules, and the system is now on life support.

Obama’s failure will come, though, not through an exposure of the smoke and mirrors surrounding his fabricated persona. There is a deeper, structural problem confronting the first post-American US government. As William Lind points out, “the heart of our inability to reform is the crisis of the state itself. Reform endangers the money and power of the New Class, which controls the state and feeds off it.” Though there will be a qualitative expansion of the state under the new regime, as money is thrown at the crisis and expanded social programs are introduced to root out “racism,” the anti-national impetus of the American System, which is at war with the forces of history, culture, and nature, is almost certainly to remain untouched. Likewise, the kleptocratic economic system, so crucial to the elites who support Obama, will go unreformed, as even vaster sums are looted from the government’s coffers in the name of his “stimulus plan.” At best, his Zimbabwe-style Keynesianism (whose soundness is a matter of debate in this period of rampant budget deficits) may provide a palliative to the crisis, but no cure. At worst, there’s simply not enough money and far too much structural rot to rescue everyone.

Given the government’s dismal track record, especially its criminal regulatory negligence, its bailout of those responsible for the crisis, and its alliance with Big Money, it’s also doubtful if it will have the wherewithal to save those firms that might become future wealth producers and sacrifice those beyond recovery. Indeed, one wonders what economy there is left to stimulate, considering that most productive enterprises have relocated offshore.

The man of destiny may turn out, then, to be the man manipulated by destiny, especially considering the impossible expectations he is certain to disappoint. As the refutation of America’s European being, it would be ever so fitting if he should preside over the demise of the failed experiment known as “the United States,” opening the way, thus, to the founding of another, more authentic expression of European America.


3. The knife

As white Americans slide deeper into the economic abyss created by their new Afro-Judaic leaders, they face something far more challenging than anything their ancestors faced in 1776. For they have fallen victim to a regime that cannot control the dysgenic economic forces it unleashes; a regime ruled by incompetents, thieves, and alien manipulators; one that never considers the interests of those it rules but attends to every whim of the rich and powerful; that is at war with the history, culture, and interests of the majority; that refuses to defend the border; that is influenced by foreign lobbies; that relentlessly attacks Christianity; and that imposes “hate” laws and free speech restraints to muzzle whites opposing its anti-national policies.

A half-dozen years ago, “Yggdrasil,” one of the pioneers of American white-nationalist thought, argued that the United States would likely go the way of the former Soviet Union if its system of financial rewards and punishments should ever cease to benefit the white majority. For though US elites have not the slightest interest in its welfare and security, the majority willingly accepted their tutelage as long as its material welfare was ensured. Today, we are entering an era when the regime’s ability to ensure its security is obviously diminishing.

For this reason, I believe the impending catastrophe has the potential to cause white Americans to abandon their allegiance to the existing system. Such a possible transfer of loyalties away from the central state will likely entail less a racial awakening than an understanding of how to cope with a hostile world, once the virtual realities of the American System collapse. Nevertheless, at that point when whites abandon the status quo, the possibility of an emerging white-nationalist movement championing their racial-social interests will quicken.

Our role as nationalists ought thus to be subversive and revolutionary. For there is nothing worth conserving in the existing antiwhite system. Against it, we need to forge a spirit that opposes it at its root—by defining Our America as a nativist variant of European civilization, affirming the primacy of our ancestors’ beliefs and values, and preparing a new Declaration of Independence.


____________________

The complete article can be read here.

Quotable quotes (Letter V)

“The Holocaust helps immunize Jews against criticism in the Diaspora.”

“The fall of Germany is the fall of the West.”

Irmin Vinson

Published in: on November 29, 2011 at 12:24 pm  Leave a Comment  

The national equivalent to what happened in New Orleans

An edited version of the following article, “Katrina’s Intimation of the End: Afterthoughts on the Impending Catastrophe,” published originally at National Vanguard, is the eleventh essay in Michael O’Meara’s book Toward the White Republic, available from Counter-Currents Publishing here.



For a moment, as Katrina’s hurricane winds and high flood waters swept away the smoke and mirrors, the lemmings glimpsed an America that was not quite the bowl of cherries our programmers would have us believe. With a major U.S. city turned over to a mob of tar-face primitives straight out of Black Hawk Down or Pontecorvo’s Burn—reports of cannibalism and savage mayhem—the state-of-the-art Superdome filled with the sub-Saharan stench of feces, sewage, and dead children—corpses floating in fetid waters: America’s Third World future suddenly affronted us in its all irrefutable barbarism. The banner of Austria’s Der Standard said it all: “Third World USA.” For here, televised for the rest of the world to see, was the coming anarchy, the horror Kurtz found in the darkened heart that was Africa—and is becoming America.

Even the Judeo-corporate powers who operate “the rolling tent show we call America” were forced to take note of the unprecedented disaster afflicting New Orleans. The New York Times, flagship of the country’s controlled media, published not one but a series of editorials that hammered home a single unambivalent point: The system is not working. In the Times’ view, the preparations leading up to the storm were criminally negligent, those in its wake pathetically inadequate, and subsequent emergencies likely to follow a similar pattern.

The momentary outburst of discontent on the editorial page of this and other Establishment organs was not, of course, the sort White nationalists feel. The elite opinion molders are exasperated by the current leadership (or lack of it) because its incompetence, irresponsibility, and corruption has allowed “the lie of multiculturalism to explode before their eyes,” exposing the scabious underside of their anti-White plutocracy. Better than most, they see that Katrina was not just a natural, but a political disaster that imperils the entire system. As one European observer (Philippe Grasset) characterizes it, Katrina is the system’s Cindy Sheehan. For against the technocratic conditioning which Baudrillard calls the simulacra deluding and manipulating the facetiously named “public,” a single elemental force—be it a mother’s insistence or nature’s fury—tore away the veil cloaking the system’s corruption of all that once distinguished White America.

The third-rate human being presiding over the United States and the rabid Zionist cabal advising him ought to take the greatest heat for the apocalyptic events that befell New Orleans. But theirs, alas, is not the sole responsibility. More seriously, fault lies at every level of government and society: For an American city was lost not because of individual negligence or incompetence, but because of the system that made such a disaster possible possible

As the accusations and recriminations mount, we, the remnants of White America, must do our utmost to prevent the media moguls, crooked politicians, alien interests, and leading lights from evading the condemnation they deserve. More critically, we need to highlight the systemic sources of their misdeeds, for the system they represent operates not simply in opposition to the interests and welfare of White America, it seeks (and, for two generations, has sought) to destroy the racial-cultural basis of the civilization our forebears founded on this continent. But even more, we need to use this occasion to make every White man aware that the present ethnocidal system targets their survival, that its cataclysmic end is approaching, and that steps need to be taken now to ensure that the next cycle of American civilization is White, European, and anti-liberal.

Since 1999, the great European nationalist, Guillaume Faye, has been predicting a series of converging catastrophes that will provoke the collapse of the liberal-democratic regimes of money that have governed the West since 1945. [See "The Widening Gyre," National Vanguard, 29 May 2005] Katrina’s destruction of New Orleans (following on the heels of 9-11 and the Iraqi fiasco) heralds what seems to be the first, albeit local, gasp of the system’s death throes.

Contrary to what the scoundrels in charge would have us believe, America was no gift of Yahweh. Like every organic or mechanical order, its social-political system contains elements that sustain its growth and development and, at the same time, ones that impair (or have the potential to impair) it. If ever the latter should dominate, the system cannot but become dysfunctional—and perhaps collapse. In Faye’s view, the present system controlling the former White nations of the West—subordinated to market principles, opened to all the world’s peoples, contemptuous of White tradition, culture, and ethnos, and indifferent to the destructive impact the system has on both human and mother nature—has reached a stage in its development where the dysfunctional elements are increasingly dominant, just as they were in the ex-Soviet Union in the early 1980s.

From this perspective, what happened in New Orleans is symptomatic of the system-threatening catastrophes gathering on the horizon. Be it racial-demographic trends, environmental deterioration, climatic shifts, casino-like economies, decadent social forms, corrupt, sclerotic institutions disloyal to their original intent—each represents a looming catastrophe whose eventual convergence will make all the others unmanageable.

Already the system is beset by failures that have begun to wear it down, erode its legitimacy, and undermine its capacity to rule. The biggest of these is related to the imperial “overreach” that began with the neocon aggression on Iraq. This was preceded by 9-11 and the dangerous geopolitical realignment it provoked and is today accompanied by a series of slower burning, but potentially greater, catastrophes related to the declining U.S. economy, the crisis of Third World colonization and the state of emergency on the border, and to all those cultural, educational, and social problems that come with the globalization of American life.

At each level of these crises—and I have named only the most obvious—the system is failing to resolve the problems besetting it. Though it continues to muddle through, a possible convergence of these mounting catastrophes—provoked, for example, by the confluence of a major economic breakdown, another ecological disaster, and a politically-discrediting scandal—will likely compound the existing crises, straining the system to the point of collapse. The result will be the national equivalent to what happened in New Orleans.

At virtually every level of its operations, the system has become more incompetent, shortsighted, and negligent. And this is not just a temporary or contingent development, for the same sort of failures have occurred day in and day out in the administration’s conduct of the Iraq war, in its international relations, and in its mismanagement of the nation’s economy. These failings, moreover, are system-wide.

Despite the media-amplified rhetoric of leftists and Negro race-hustlers, incompetence and irresponsibility during the emergency were not confined to the top. The corrupt municipal government of New Orleans’ foul-mouthed major, Ray Nagin, was no less guilty of criminal incompetence, neglecting to implement the most obvious precautions: It failed to issue a mandatory evacuation order until pressured by Washington, failed to implement it, and failed to make use of hundreds of city buses to transport those without cars. At the Morial Convention Center and at the Superdome, where it went through the motions of taking action, nothing of consequence was actually done, as local officials waited for “Whitey” to intervene and take charge. The horror tales now told of these sites are rivaled by few in literature. The utter absurdity of the New Orleans’ municipal effort assumed an especially unreal quality when Nagin gave his entire police force (which had shamed itself in the course of events) a five-day paid vacation in Las Vegas, once FEMA and the National Guard arrived to take control.

Thus it was that an indifferent, Israeli-oriented authority at the top and an utterly incompetent, African-led one at the bottom converged in New Orleans to create one of the great disasters in American history. The system’s routine production of such leaders (is it possible to imagine any other system in which a mentally unbalanced non-entity could become the nation’s número uno or a jive-talking African clown the mayor of a major American city?) not only condemns it to self-destructive actions: It closes itself off from any possibility of self-correction, as the illusory values and beliefs its liberal and neocon ideologues arrogantly propagate are confused with reality itself. Not surprisingly, the virtualist mindset of such a leadership is already preparing the basis for future disasters.

But more telling than even the system’s growing incompetence and illusory grasp of reality is its determination to replace its core European population. Evident in the terms that have come to designate New Orleans—Mogadishu-on-the-Mississippi, Haiti North, Post-America America—this once splendid enclave of Franco-American civilization has, since desegregation, been turned into a Third World slum. With a pre-Katrina population more than two-thirds Black, New Orleans had, in effect, ceased to be an American city in any ethno-cultural sense of the term. And it was the non-White racial character of the city’s population that was instrumental in turning a natural disaster into a social-racial nightmare. For once order collapsed in the wake of the flooding, and the veneer of civilization controlling the city’s Congoloid residents gave way, the ruined city almost immediately descended into barbarism. (As David Duke pointed out, the only thing separating American order from African anarchy is that “thin blue line of police armed with high-powered weapons.”)

How, though, is this racial turmoil reflective of the system’s growing dysfunctionality? Besides the fact that the system has eroded the country’s earlier White civilizational forms and violated the most elementary requirements of every social organization (i.e. the biological defense of its people’s genetic interests), it has encouraged the growth of the non-White population through a consciously-implemented policy of open borders and mass immigration, through welfare programs that subsidize non-White births and discourage White ones, through a brain-washing, totalitarian ideology of multiculturalism that undermines the historic conventions of America’s European culture and allows whole cities to be turned over to alien hordes. All these policies, to one degree or another, reflect the system’s effort to undermine the country’s White population and replace it with a non-White one attuned to the demographic requirements of the new global economy.

That the barely humanoid character of many of these “new Americans” lack the civilizational potential of Whites, that they are inordinately prone to violence and aggression, that they harbor murderous feelings towards the former majority, that they sustain a counter-culture of drugs, prostitution, and crime, that they soak up public funds and deprive other programs, like levee maintenance, of needed monies, that they made New Orleans one of America’s murder capitals, all, again, stem from the system’s Judeo-liberal disposition to privilege market exchanges, international labor markets, population transfers, multicultural deculturation, and the destruction of the nation’s historic European core. These anti-White policies are, indeed, so extreme that even criminals and miscreants were allowed to serve in New Orleans police force (as long as they had the proper hue). Was it surprising, then, that Whites caught in this multicultural hell were targeted for aggression, that nursing homes and children hospitals were attacked, or that White areas of Louisiana and Mississippi devastated by the storm have since been ignored or marginalized by government relief efforts?

For those who care to see, the horrors of New Orleans herald America’s possible future. Given the nature of the dominant forces, and the system nurturing and directing them, things are almost certain to get much worse, and do so at a quickening rate. Thus, as the various catastrophes afflicting American life begin to converge in a greater systemic disaster, the system itself is likely to collapse. Such a collapse will be either good or bad, depending: For collapse will either threaten our people with new, more horrendous ethnocidal forces, or it will create an opportunity to begin again. To ensure that the latter is the case, the defenders of America’s European core will need to start heeding the writing on the wall. As Guillaume Faye says, we need to start thinking in post-catastrophic terms.

Quotable quotes (Letter T)

“The relatively few intellectuals that we have are the most important men alive today. But ultimately, it will be the artist who spreads our vision through fiction and music and other mediums.”

Trainspotter

Published in: on November 28, 2011 at 12:55 pm  Leave a Comment  

The most authoritative treatment of white separatism

The following article, “The Northwest Novels of H. A. Covington,” published originally at Vanguard News Network, is the sixth essay in Michael O’Meara’s book Toward the White Republic, available from Counter-Currents Publishing here.





“Those who want to live, let them fight, and those who do not want to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to live.”

—Adolf Hitler



H. A. Covington’s Northwest Trilogy of novels—Hill of the Ravens (2003), A Distant Thunder (2004), and A Mighty Fortress (2005) [a fourth and a fifth novels, The Brigade (2007) and Freedom's Sons (unpublished MS) were written after this essay was published]—now represents the most authoritative treatment of white separatism in the English language. Both as popular fiction and political tract, it is a remarkable work. But most remarkable of all is the utter silence that surrounds it. If not for a VNN “commentator” (the wise and judicious “New America”), I might never have heard of it.

I’m not quite certain why this is. Covington’s Trilogy is infinitely more readable and convincing than William Pierce’s Turner Diaries (now one of our classics), but has probably sold only a fraction as many copies. Part of the problem with its reception might lie in the fact that Covington, a veteran of the NS movement, has made not a few enemies within “the racially conscious community,” evident in his numerous critical references to William Pierce, as well as to Matt Koehl, Ben Klassen, Tom Metzger, David Duke, Martin Webster, John Tyndall, and others.

Without any actual knowledge of Covington’s personal history or of the sectarian squabbles that have alienated him from other racial nationalists, there may be, for this reason, a subtext to his Trilogy that eludes me.

I only know the Trilogy as a work of political fiction.

On this basis, though, I can categorically say that Covington is a great talent and that his work speaks, as no other does, to the burning question of our age.

Political fiction has one overriding purpose: to reach those who can’t be reached through rational discourse. In this, Covington’s Trilogy is superb. It is full of memorable characters—classic American types (daring, two-fisted white men) who remind us of our ancestors and not the ridiculous creatures we see on nightly television. It abounds with actions and adventures that evoke our earliest racial memories and reveal what we can be once free of the Jews’ lunar spirit. It conveys the ideals of our movement in a language and style accessible to those who might otherwise ignore them. It tells an exciting story that is both entertaining and didactic. But above all it imagines a course of action—perhaps the one possible course of action—that will ensure our existence as a people. Whatever one may say of Covington the activist, it has to be acknowledged that he’s made a work of art of his separatist vision, and it deserves a hearing.

It is not, though, his art that I want to address in this essay, but rather certain of his ideas, three of which I think are fundamental to the politics of white racial survival in this period. To put these ideas in their proper context, something, though, needs first to be said of the story Covington tells.

As a separatist, he believes the present situation is such that any hope of reversing America’s “de-Europeanization” or replacing the Judeo-globalist regime in Washington responsible for it is no longer feasible. The sole option left to whites seeking to ensure their existence in North America is to break off a portion of the lands their ancestors possessed and establish a white homeland. To this end he proposes the “migration” of racially aware whites to the Pacific Northwest—the whitest section of the United States—to create there the critical mass that will be needed once the time comes to wage an anti-colonial war against the Washington regime.

Premised on this migration, his three novels revolve around events that occur sometime in the second or third decade of the 21st century, when all the tendencies presently in place have been taken to their horrific and ethnocidal extension.

For reasons almost providential, whites in Coeur d’Alene Idaho finally rebel, when they spontaneously resist federal agents attempting to carry off the children of a politically incorrect but well-regarded family. Locally based members of the “party” created by the migration then intervene. They help arm, organize, and lead several hundred Coeur d’Alene whites against the troops sent in to crush them. Their rebellion is quickly quashed, but, like Ireland’s Easter Uprising, it ignites a war for national independence.

From three different perspectives Covington tells the story of the Northwest Volunteer Army (NVA), as it leads an IRA-style terror campaign against the Judeo-globalist forces in control of the United States. The NVA’s struggle is greatly facilitated by the fact that in this future period American society and the US government have become even more incompetent than they are today. The US military is bogged down in endless Mideastern wars fought on Israel’s behalf; its social system is increasingly dysfunctional, balkanized into rival racial-ethnic interest groups; an ever-growing part of the white population, unable to compete with coolie labor, is condemned to unemployment or conscription; and the material prosperity that has long served as a race-obliterating opiate has given way to the growing impoverishment and alienation of the white masses.

For five bitter years, the NVA wages the “war of the flea,” blowing up key infrastructure, sabotaging databases, attacking the regime’s tax-collecting and judiciary agents, intimidating employers of non-white labor—even sending Volunteers to disrupt the vulnerable lifelines that allow New York and Washington to function as the regime’s central nervous system.

Unable to sustain the damages and disruptions of these assaults, the federal government, mainly for financial reasons, is eventually forced to negotiate a peace settlement with the insurgents, negotiations which end up sanctioning the secession of Washington, Oregon, and Idaho (along with parts of Northern California, Wyoming, and Montana) from the United States and the establishment of a white homeland under the political auspices of a Northwest American Republic.


1. The Jewnited States

Unlike racial conservatives and not a few white nationalists, Covington sees the United States—not just the current Administration, but the “System” itself—as the enemy. He calls it “the fount and wellspring of all that [is] evil” in our time. For at least two generations this state has carried out a systemic assault on European America, forcing it to congregate with hostile races; promoting integration, miscegenation, and the destruction of the white family; adopting policies that siphon off its wealth, pollute its culture, and corrupt its children; but above all, legitimating its self-destruction through the imposition of dysgenic behaviors and values.

With “only the most remote and tenuous historical connection with the country and system of government which was originally established and envisioned by the Founding Fathers,” the United States today has become a Jew-led corporate plutocracy that denies whites their birthright. But it’s not just its state, with its race-destroying policies, that wars on them. The entire American social system—the reigning civilizational forms—have become no less noxious to their existence. Covington describes early 21st-century America (and this is a projection of current trends) as a world of unspeakably vile sexual perversions… a kleptocracy, quite literally ruled by criminals, some of whom were so bad and so blatant that they were even indicted under the Americans’ own laws… a world based on no other foundation than sheer greed, wallowing in the most gross and despicable material gluttony… a wasteland of spiritual emptiness, moral corruption, and cultural pollution… an entire society based on a bizarre and grotesque moral inversion: the utterly ridiculous and thoroughly evil idea that all humanoid creatures are in some manner equal.

This world born of the Jews’ materialistic metaphysics—this world in which man is viewed primarily as “an economic animal rather than as a spiritual being with a soul” —turns everyone into either a consumer or a commodity and everything that has traditionally made life worth living—family, community, religion—into an economic calculation. Whether rich or poor, the “citizens” of this Jewified enterprise live “all doped up, dumbed down, zoned out… confused, hostile, paranoid… looking out for nobody but Number One.” America’s traditional European life forms become not only unsustainable under such a system, they are demonized and rendered criminal.

No self-respecting white man, Covington assumes, would want to preserve, reform, or redeem such an abomination. As one of his Volunteers says: “I didn’t want to be an American any more. I wanted to be a man instead, a white man.”


2. A war of White liberation

Despite the passivity and conservatism that mark much of the racially conscious community, it is not difficult to understand why our nobler spirits would want to wash their hands of the American experiment.

With some justice, Covington argues that a half century of peaceful, legal methods to reverse the racial policies of the United States have been totally ineffective. “Petitions have been ignored… The electoral and political process has been undermined… The judiciary has become an instrument of racial and social tyranny.” All the while, the reigning powers continue their de-Europeanization, using all their vast powers to re-engineer the American population and eviscerate its racial heritage.

Covington’s work rests on the rather unchallengeable contention that nothing so far has had the slightest effect in stemming the enveloping tide of mud. Efforts to create an alternative media, raise white consciousness, mobilize voters around racial issues, or post another illuminating exposé on the internet have had virtually no effect in halting our advance toward the abyss. Those among us who continue to emphasize the need to educate or awaken people, he argues, usually end up doing “nothing more than hide behind an email address while playing with the computer in one’s basement rec room, with a bowl of nachos and a cold brewski beside the mouse.” Relatedly, most actual efforts by racialists and right-wingers to act in the real world continue to aim at influencing the Judeo-corporate system, rather than getting free of it.

Given that all the forces of indoctrination, socialization, and influence are in enemy hands and that all the principal institutions and social-economic structures are arrayed against us, the thought of using the system’s established forms to bring down the anti-white regime in Washington, repatriate the 100 million muds occupying our lands, or reverse the present ethnocidal course of American developments is nothing short of fantastic. Given also that every effort to reverse American racial policy has failed and that this policy threatens the survival of the European race in North America, the sole remaining recourse, Covington insists, is the “right” to take up arms against the system threatening us.

As he imagines it, the struggle to establish an independent white homeland in the American Northwest will resemble an anti-colonial war, waged in ways not unlike the campaign the Provisional IRA carried out against the British government in Northern Ireland after 1969. Sustained by a migration of racially aware whites to the region (Covington mentions 50,000 migrants), the NVA that is to arise from some future effort to acquire a “small piece of territory” will challenge Washington’s monopoly of armed force and undermine its revenue producing sources, making it impossible for the federal government to maintain its authority over the Pacific Northwest.

But how realistic is such a prospective struggle? To many it will seem even more fantastic than the alternatives that Covington criticizes. And to those who know something about the physical-force wing of Irish Republicanism, it will seem no less fantastic to imagine that American white nationalists (whose struggles are waged almost entirely in cyberspace) could emulate the IRA gunmen, street fighters, and terrorists who forced Her Majesty’s Government to the negotiating tables.

These objections, however, are not actually an argument against Covington’s notion of a white liberation struggle—only an obstacle to be overcome. History, moreover, is full of improbable undertakings. Who would have thought that 10,000 lightly-armed Sunni insurgents would check the conquests of America’s imperial legions? Great historical transformations are almost always implausible until they happen. Part of this is due to the fact that it is rarely the size of one’s armed divisions or the quality of one’s military technology that matters most, but rather certain qualities of the human spirit. As Victor Hugo put it: “Mightier than the tread of marching armies is the power of an idea whose time has come.” If American whites, especially their racially conscious vanguard, should ever imbue the NW migration with the force of a Sorelian myth (that is, with the force to act), there is simply no telling what might happen. “Nothing is impossible”—not even the thought of white men marching to the sound of the guns.

To those who would dismiss this as wishful thinking, it might be added that not only does the survival of the white race depend upon such a mythic transformation of white consciousness, but that our age has turned such transformations into something of a Zeitgeist. With the advent of globalization and the fourth-generation war it provokes, traditional state systems have everywhere gone into crisis, as anti-national elites endeavor to impose a one-world superstate that reduces everything to the market demands of the Jew-led Yankee money men cashing in on the extermination of the white race.

The idea of a white liberation struggle is not, then, entirely implausible. Nor would there be any lack of potential Volunteers. Sections of the middle class, deprived by globalization of the lifestyles which ensured their former passivity, are already feeling embittered and by-passed. A sharp economic downturn, the collapse of the dollar, a humiliating military retreat from the Middle East, an energy crisis that undermines our automotive civilization, a protracted governmental paralysis—the conditions could suddenly arise when elements among the complacent, TV-programmed white masses are forced to the conclusion that their allegiances are misplaced. In any case, conditions for whites are almost certain to continue to deteriorate.

Echoing the theorists of partisan, guerrilla, or asymmetrical warfare of the last half century, Covington contends that the bigger and more complex the Jewnited States becomes, the more vulnerable it is to “a few brave men with weapons in their hands and the courage to use them.” American society, he notes, is “so complex, everything so interactive and interlocking and dependent on everything else, that when you cut one link in the chain the whole works just grounds to a halt.”

The struggle for white liberation would also benefit from the fact that the US government is already a corrupt, mismanaged institution and that American society, premised on purely economic criteria, lacks real cohesion. The whole system, in fact, rests on a foundation of sand. All the powers of corruption, incompetence, cowardice, and short-term thinking conspire against it. (Think of Katrina New Orleans.) Its declining revenues and budget constraints are even now making it difficult to fund its repressive apparatus. At the same time, the system is more and more served by inept Negroes, and the Jews who manage the system’s decision-making centers are beginning to overreach themselves, pushing their host people in ways that formerly ended in pogroms. Is it so inconceivable, then, to think that an armed white opposition could force it out of the Northwest?


3. A homeland

Once it is accepted that the United States constitutes the principal threat to white existence and that whites will be free of its perverse, ethnocidal policies only through force of arms, then the third, most crucial facet of Covington’s vision comes into focus: The imperative of creating a white homeland.

Terre et Peuple, Blut und Boden: The notion that every people needs its own land is as old as Europe itself. In the postmodern, transnational, and global order favored by our one-world elites such a notion, of course, is deemed obsolete, as if the quantitative monetary principles of the world market are a better way of organizing social life than traditional ones based on healthy families, organic communities, and ethnoracial identities.

In the last generation, this ancient notion has assumed a new urgency: For the rising tide of color has everywhere begun to seep into the former white homelands, threatening the integrity of white life. One more generation of Third World immigration and the great race passes away forever.

A racially exclusive homeland, the antithesis of the New World Order, would in Covington’s view be our “ark to weather the great flood of mud.” “It is absolutely essential,” he argues, “that the white race acquire a Homeland of its own, some place on earth where white children can be born and raised in physical and spiritual safety, and where our numbers may be restored and the threat of racial extinction overcome.”

Based on blood, not creed or economics, such a home-land would guarantee the perpetuity of our people. It would also solve a great many of the social, political, and cultural problems that presently ail us. For once free of the Jews who have pathologized white existence and who have set the colored hordes on us, we could begin dealing honestly and forthrightly with the problems besetting our civilization. Indeed, once free of the Jews and their multiracial legions, many of these problems would simply vanish. The result would almost certainly be a renaissance of European life in North America. As one of Covington’s characters observes: “When you have stability and unity in a racially homogenous society, you’d be amazed what a small country like ours can accomplish.”

This vision of a sovereign Aryan Republic is, of course, merely a figment of Covington’s imagination, but then again imagination, as Shakespeare reminds us, “Bodies forth the things unknown.”


___________________

For more information about Covington’s books and the coming sovereign Republic for the white people click here.

Quotable quotes (Letter S)

“If White Europeans and Americans ever wish to reestablish their own racial sovereignty, they must demystify the first foe: capitalism.”

Tom Sunic



“Jewry’s most salient and essential characteristic is racism. That’s the secret of Jewish success. That’s what’s really unique about them.”

— Svigor

Published in: on November 27, 2011 at 11:38 am  Comments (1)  

Spitting on the avatar of God

Now that I am reproducing the best essays of Michael O’Meara’s Toward the White Republic, I’m becoming more conscious than ever that the so-called Jewish problem (like the Muslim problem) is but an epiphenomenon of a deep corruption within the white psyche, which unlike Christendom allowed the emancipation of Jews in the first place right after the French Revolution.

What strikes me the most about self-styled “counter-jihadists” is that they fancy themselves as defenders of the West, when, in reality, through their blind philo-Semitism they’re attacking the West.

Something similar could be said of white nationalists who support the unspiritual, degenerate music that has possessed westerners since the 1960s—what I call Neanderthalism—, as manifested in the following piece, “Is there no end?” that Iranian for Aryans wrote today.

But before reproducing his article let me indulge with a few compasses of music with a solo from a Norwegian fiddle called a Hardinger that represent the spirit of Rohan’s capital and Éowyn, its nymph. A single minute of music composed in our century that, in sharp contrast to rock, I consider inspiring:

Éowyn and the Golden Hall of Meduseld


I [Iranian for Aryans] started my first blog back in 2004. One of my first entries was on the topic of non-classical music within the WN [white nationalist] “movement”. I excoriated the “music” and, therefore, did not condone those who listened to it. Today, I’m still of the same opinion. However, I realize now that the poison is deeper and is beloved by those to whom one should look up to, or at least, respect.

One such example is a spate of articles on Counter Currents extolling WN “music”. Basically, the music is a hodge-podge of heavy metal, rock’n’roll, and folksy music. To sum it up, it reeks.

Julian Lee has authored two articles that deal with the topic of the “white singing voice”. His style is insipid and his tenets and conclusions are dubious if not straight-out wrong. He goes through a litany of various White (are they White men at all?) vocal types (crooners, screechers, whatnot). He deconstructs them, he views them as if through a microscope, and then pontificates on them. But these are not the issue.  The problem lies with his espousal of, and love for, non-classical music; for rock “music”. I don’t refer to old-school country and bluegrass. I refer to WN “music” and its non-, or even anti-, WN forbears.

The man goes on and on about this rock “star” and that rock “star”. Enough already! It’s all junk. The godawful, mephitic, aural violations that emanate from what-passes-for-music in his article are not only an embarrassment and a waste of time, but antipodal to a truly uplifted soul that yearns for everything pulchritudinous, elevated, noble, veracious, and supernal.

What’s worse is that Greg Johnson, the editor of Counter Currents, who posts good articles on Mahler and Elgar, in addition to featuring lovely paintings, likes rock’n’roll, and, apparently, dislikes my barrage of antagonistic criticism, so much so, in fact, that I think he’s not publishing it.

I’ve given up on making my point as it has become an ad nauseum issue.

I agree with the mullahs of Iran. Those who promote “Western” music, are, according to the Shia clerics, enemies of God (Truth, Beauty, Enlightenment, Health, and Joy).

If one is in love with the White race, in love with what it has created, then to promote, or let alone, listen to rock, is to spit on the avatar of God.

It is the poet who creates nations, not the scientist

The following articles, “The Sword” and “The Edge of the Sword,” published originally at The Occidental Quarterly, are the second and third essays in Michael O’Meara’s book Toward the White Republic, available from Counter-Currents Publishing here.





The Sword

My article “Toward the White Republic,” which recently won the TOQ essay contest (though under shady circumstances according to one critic), has been the subject of several internet discussions, most of which, typical of the medium, have produced more heat than light.

Nevertheless, around the margins of this discussion and in a few genuine flashes of insight buried under the rubble of meandering commentary, certain signs suggest that white racial consciousness in the English-speaking world may be in the process, however slowly, of changing, as white nationalists challenge the hegemony of the race realists.

I say this, of course, based on my particular understanding of white nationalism—which is mine alone—and not that of any group, least of all that of a conservative outfit like The Occidental Quarterly.

My sense of this changing consciousness is perhaps exaggerated by the fact that the prospects of white nationalism at last finding its way into the political arena seems a bit brighter now that the black Jesus is losing his magic touch, that the still too comfortable white middle class is already up in arms over his proposed Big Brother state (which they will have to pay for), and that the impending economic tsunami is about to sweep away the materialist illusions that have misguided whites for the last half century or so.

A great cleansing could be coming—probably won’t, but could.

Influenced by Heidegger and Evola, I’ve long believed that the “malaise” afflicting the white man is profound, traceable in part to the advent of modernity, which introduced certain civilizational and ontological principles inimical to European life.

This malaise has taken a toll no less on the racially conscious community, which upholds not a few of the same principles that are today responsible for the impending demise of white America: especially principles associated with the disembedded individualism of Adam Smith, the scientism of capitalism’s technoeconomic order, and the nihilism that seeks to disenfranchise religion, morality, and the significance of culture.

Part of this is due, I suspect, to the fact that the “racially conscious community” has long been dominated by the idealism of “race realists” or what, before 1945, was called “scientific racism,” a school associated with Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard, along with such scientists as Charles Davenport.

The tasks of “scientific racism” were considerably different than the tasks we now face. The largely scientific orientation of realists upholding their truths was appropriate to a society which still had a color-line and kept Negroes out of the public sphere. Against reformers, Jews, and do-gooders who sought to integrate alien races, race realists simply needed to demonstrate the terrible social and genetic costs of racial integration.

This not the case today, where the issue is a matter of asserting ourselves as a free people, rather than defending an already established status quo.

Though the principles of scientific racism are now clearly beyond the pale of respectability, science itself nevertheless remains the conceptual bedrock upon which modern liberal society rests.

Ideologically, liberalism emerged in the eighteenth century, as proponents of scientific rationalism endeavored to apply their principles to society and state. All traditions, beliefs, customs, and affiliations—that is, all the qualitative facets of life that are the source of meaning—were thus forced to give way to the quantitative, materialist, abstract, and inherently alienating imperatives of a scientific instrumentalism that sought to impose its bloodless order on the white world for the sake of homo oecomicus.

This emphasis on the materialist and quantitative has resulted in the comforts of our consumer society, as well as the less than comforting realities of its consummate meaninglessness. We may, as a consequence, be materially richer—yet spiritually, and in other ways, we’ve become the most desperate of the poor. A truly enriching life, as tradition holds, depends less on the means of existence than on its meaning.

It is only when the world is no longer experienced as a sacred whole and knowledge is fragmented into narrow scientific disciplines that man becomes a social atom regulated by purely rationalist principles detached from superior ideals and subjected to subpersonal, collectivist, and naturalist criteria, whose inevitable culmination is the present decadence.

To think, then, that a popularization of Salter’s Ethnic Genetic Interests, a revival of Darwinian biology (with its propensity to see organic life in terms of self-regulating market principles), or the privileging of a (philosophically naive) analytic-empiricism has any role to play in saving us from the menacing forces arrayed against white life—well, to be kind, it’s too absurd to refute.

Science simply does not understand human being, just as its truths cannot defend us from the forces favoring our extinction.

Heidegger says “science does not think”—it only enunciates the facts, which it has no means to interpret or evaluate—because that would mean appealing to normative, hence unscientific standards. Understanding is the work of culture—the work of accumulated legacies that imagine, populate, and make meaningful man’s world.

Science, as such, can’t tell us why a handful of men, armed only with a will and a goal, would think they could defeat the greatest empire in history or why my favorite aunt is the one who defends her country’s honor with a German accent.

As much as we nationalists respect the authority of science, we consider it secondary, say, to the extraordinary authority of Homer, who gave birth (in his myth-making) to the Greeks and the Greeks to all the rests of us.

What’s important, here, is to realize that the truths of the Iliad, or those of Mendelian genetics, are born of the imagination, not of some natural illumination, and that their significance pertains not to “the thing itself,” but to what lies in us, as a people rooted in time and being, with a destiny distinct to who we are.

One historian of the ancient Greeks, Paul Veyne, argues that: Men do not find the truth, they create it, as they create their history.

Thus it was that whenever the Greeks criticized the fictitious stories that had grown up around their myths, it was not to reject myth, but to uncover the deeper, more truthful basis—the authentic tradition—which they took as the ideal representation of who they were. For myth—this “constitutive imagination of their tribe”—is what gave them a meaning, a vocation, and a destiny—which is something quite simply beyond science’s capacity.

This is not to say that science is the opposite of poetic myth, in the way truth is the opposite of error, but simply that it is a different and by no means superior way, to know the world—at least the physical world in its quantitative and materialist expressions.

It is imagination, not the analytical formulations of science, that gives us access to the real in the world.

The notion that truth can be presented stripped of myth is itself a myth. Nietzsche argues that there are no facts, only interpretations. This doesn’t mean that the real doesn’t exist, only that it’s impossible to apprehend without some interpretative faculty, analytic or artistic, that rests on mythic foundations.

Myth, not coincidentally, undergirds the foundation of our culture. It operates still in the highest reaches of scientific speculation. It speaks to us as a collective solidarity, not an individual conscience; it expresses a determination to act; it is beyond dispute; it cannot be defeated; it speaks the language to which all human beings are most responsive; it transmits the defining experiences of authority and ultimacy, the source of sacredness.

For myth, the world is not a product of rational calculation, but rather a primordial legacy imbued with the weight of tradition, spirit, and blood.

It is the poet, relatedly, who creates nations, not the scientist. (Creativity, need it be added, is hardly born of analytical reason—if such a disembodied thing ever existed. The great scientific breakthroughs [as Kuhn with his "paradigms," Bachelard with his "epistomological ruptures," and Foucault with his "epistemes" explain] are rarely the product of a scientific reason applied to neutral source materials or facts, but rather come from something else entirely—something more akin to the creative side of the artist’s sensibility.)

Novalis said that “poetry is the base of society”—for without poetry, there is no myth, and without myth, there is no culture—and hence no means of creating a people.

When white nationalists appeal to a mobilizing myth, it’s not because they dismiss discursive reason or the authority of evidence and experience. Rather, they simply assume it to be the more elemental and galvanizing form of our understanding.

As Sorel, Le Bon, Pareto, Weber, Mosca, and others have shown, the success of an idea depends less on its logical virtues and demonstrative capacities than on its mythic representation of certain collective impulses.

If man were a machine, rationality alone would suffice. But man’s “rationality” is rooted in the irrationality of his collective consciousness, in the mythic postulates of his culture, in the norms and values of his communal existence, and in the strange, occasional stirrings of his blood.

White nationalists pay homage to race realists less for validating the significance of racial differences and highlighting the dangers of miscegenation (whose obviousness needs no scientific elaboration), but for their often gallant effort to keep America white.

Today, however, in this miscegenating age indifferent to the scientific implications of race differences, our task is not to defend a no longer existing racial hierarchy, but to save what remains of white America. The white nationalist struggle, as such, is about freeing whites from the anti-racist order threatening them—not about carrying out the sort of educational campaigns that occupied the scientific racists.

Race realism, moreover, is only a part of what defines white nationalism—no matter how primordial blood may be. The racial truths of the biological sciences are indeed meaningful only in the context of our people’s life. For they, not the material world of science, are what makes these truths significant.

In favoring an independent white homeland and assuming, rather than privileging, the postulates of race realism, white nationalists hold that the world is not a marketplace of ideas and that the best ideas rarely get the best market price. No matter how primordial blood may be, the white nationalist struggle is more about the soul and spirit that blood brings forth.

More crucially, white nationalists are not so naive as to believe that their America will be saved by facts or scientific demonstrations. Rather, they believe that only by acting as other oppressed and threatened nations have had to act to insure their survival will their America survive: That is, only by struggling to become a sovereign nation, free of the forces opposing them as a people, will their kind have a future (aspiring to do this, of course, in strict adherence to the legal provisions of the US Constitution).

White nationalists, as a consequence, assume that the defense and rebirth of white life in North America will have little to do with science or truth or justice or any other grand abstraction (so fond to the language of liberalism), but only with the struggle for power—a struggle old as the ages—one which, even in our dumbed-down information society, is not about issues related to science—but about the politics of imposing our cosmos (order) on the prevailing (and encroaching) chaos—above all, a political struggle in the Schmittian sense of determining who our real enemy is and of knowing that the ultimate goal is not about abstract truths, but about white survival.

La politique, Napoleon said, c’est le destin.

The political in this sense opposes scientific rationality, whose calculating and determining materialism drags man down to his animal side, and instead favors all that lifts man above and beyond himself, as a destining being.

Every distinct people is indeed a destiny forged by common values expressed in certain basic myths. Without those myths, there are no collective values and without collective values there are no common destiny—and no people.

This makes the struggle for nationhood a matter of political, cultural, and social struggle, not science.

The change I see affecting the racially conscious community is related to what may be an emerging understanding of the need now, if we are serious about guaranteeing a future for white children, to go beyond race realism and to start thinking like a nationalist vanguard, which sees itself as the kernel of a future White Nation—born from the desperation of the decayed and increasingly tyrannical system of the powers that be.

The historical course offered by myth, in contrast to the inherently passive determinism of scientific rationalism, is a choice for heroes, not bookworms or computer hobbyists, for it opens the future to those tiny grains of sand that inevitably bring the great machines to a grinding halt.

In the struggle we’ll need to wage if we are to survive, myth is not simply a more appropriate and powerful way to understand what needs to be done. It taps those primal forces that will empower us to reject the devitalizing forces of liberal modernity and to assert ourselves in a re-enchanted world with a destining project distinct to who we are, as New World Europeans refusing to accept our programmed extinction.

If there are odd individuals here or there who can or do respond solely on the basis of self-interest alone, that’s fine—but they are more likely to end up in the race realist rather than the white nationalist camp.

One final point: Besides promising to free us and ensure our continuity, the mythic imperatives of white nationalism offers us another chance to expiate our “sins”—to do the penance that will make us better men, more like our great grandfathers, as Harold Covington says—degenerate and characterless types that we have since become. For it’s not just that whites have been hoodwinked and manipulated by their new masters, as many would like to believe. From an Aryan perspective, they have all too readily abandoned almost everything that once made them such a world-forming race.

To undo all that has alienated us from our innermost spirit (and that’s a great deal), we no longer need to keep harping on the teachings of race science, which whites have been conditioned to resist. Instead, our task today is to recover the values and traditions that made our ancestors strong.

To do this we need, in imitation of those who have gone before and in anticipation of those who will follow, to struggle, sword in hand, to be what our myths have destined us to be.

The sword is white nationalism.



The Edge of the Sword

Author’s Note: Myth and science are tangential to the real issue facing us, which is about politics and preservation. The following is an effort to sharpen (or maybe just to repeat) certain ideas presented in “The Sword.”

One.

The starting point for all discussions of white preservation must begin with the realization that we have entered an Interregnum, a period of unprecedented danger during which we are destined to experience a great transformation. The most conspicuous sign of this came in November 2008, with the advent of the blackest night, symbol not of sleep but of death.

The question that now faces us is: Will it be our death as a people or the death in us of all those things that have led to this most desperate stage of our history?

Two.

The historical antecedents of white nationalism are many: Kearney’s Workingmen’s Party, the First and Second Klans, various state’s rights and segregationist movements of the 1940s and ’50s, perhaps George Wallace’s American Independent Party, as well as a horde of smaller, more sectarian organizations.

For the past generation, however, the racialist movement defending our way of life has ceased to be political and become largely a race-realist affair—which was to be expected, given that the race realists presently dominating white discourse are the heirs of the prewar “scientific racists,” who saw their task in essentially educational terms.

Three.

Scientific racists in the early twentieth century indeed played an important intellectual role in defending the existing system of racial relations.

But that role bears no relationship to the one facing white Americans in this period, however much race realism remains a crucial part of the white-nationalist arsenal.

Then, when scientific racists commanded the center stage of public opinion, America was still a white man’s country, it had a well delineated color line, an established racial hierarchy (which most whites unconsciously accepted), and twice it succeeded in imposing immigration restrictions on a reluctant government (against Asians in the early 1880s and against non-Nordics between 1921 and ’24).

In this context, scientific racists—who came mainly from the upper classes and were often academics or intellectuals—merely needed to popularize their findings to defend the pro-white status quo.

Today, their race realist successors have continued in this tradition, trying to re-educate whites in the knowledge of what their great grandparents once knew.

This knowledge, moreover, is mainly of a scientific kind and aimed primarily at informing elites and influencing public policy—typical Enlightenment forms of metapolitics. Not coincidentally, such metapolitics accepts the liberal supposition that man’s world revolves around the objectively-defined self-interest of rational individuals, whose identities are rooted in materialist considerations rather than in the infinitely less quantifiable ones of history, culture, and kin.

Four.

As Rome burns, the question inevitably arises of how reasonable it is to continue writing cookbooks amidst the flames devouring us. This, though, is what race realists will end up doing if our racially conscious community does not soon break with its naive scientism and assume the shape of a political-metapolitical front to represent the higher collective interests of European America.

Five.

Since state policy has turned against white Americans and come to pose a direct threat to their continuity, our tasks today is a matter of ensuring our collective survival as a people, which means it is a matter of forming organizations and movements to struggle on our behalf.

Six.

To this end, white nationalists will need to break with the exclusively academic/scientific orientation of race realists and start building a nationalist vanguard to lead their people. The question is: How?

This is the question that needs to be addressed and addressed not as an epistemological issue (i.e., as an issue of knowledge), but politically, culturally, socially, and in other ways that intersect our experiences in the world.

Seven.

Science (which too is infused with myth and ideology) is for academic debate, myth and ideology are for popular social movements. There is, though, no hard and fast division between them. Those seeking to make the epistemological difference between them primary seem not fully conscious of the great historical tasks facing white men in the twenty-first century, just as their dismissal of popular political mobilizations as a “misty and idealistic totemism” seems to reflect the typical liberal propensity to avoid engagements that might involve them in real world activity.

Context here is all important. If I need a cancerous growth removed from my body, I’m not going to have a student of myth do it, just as if I want to learn about José Antonio Primo de Rivera, I would prefer to ask a Spanish historian rather than a geneticist.

Similarly, if I want to build a nationalist movement, I know it’s going to take something more than the virtues of Frank Salter to convince whites to abandon their individualistic and materialistic lives (which, incidentally, are usually led under the sign of self-interest)—it will take something bigger and grander that touches them at the core of their being.

That something can only be found in myth, culture, history, and blood—in all those things that transcend the individual, that link him to a higher destiny, and that refuse the safe, sanitized detachment of modernity’s privatized realm.

Eight.

Myth is not “mystification,” even if our naive empiricists assume it to be; it is simply another way (and at times a more powerful way) of apprehending and communicating a truth.

In one situation it is obviously appropriate, in another situation science is.

A mythic figure like Jeanne d’Arc touches a Frenchman more profoundly than the vast intellectual heritage of Cartesianism because St. Joan evokes a hundred defining emotions lodged in a Frenchman’s heart, doing so in ways that the elegant, yet bloodless postulates of Descartes’ scientific rationalism cannot.

The Cartesians’ powerful heritage is not, as a consequence, unimportant to France; it simply has little role to play in defending the nation from those who seek its destruction. Relatedly, in the numerous assertions of France’s nationalist movement, St. Joan is omnipresent because of all she represents, while Descartes rarely has anything to add, except perhaps in keeping debates at the conceptual level orderly and logical.

If you want, then, to engage in discussions about race and racial differences, you bring in the geneticists and Darwinists. But if you want to build a nationalist movement to ensure the continuity of white America, you appeal to Andrew Jackson and Thomas Jefferson, to the Battle of the Alamo and Kearney’s Workingmen, to the Stars and Bars and the sustaining voices of those quintessential representatives of America’s white culture, the Carter family.

Those who think that IQ, JQ, EGI, GSS, HBD, etc., are somehow more important in mobilizing a people than appeals to their spirit or destiny do not seem to know, “empiricists” that they claim to be, anything of history, especially the history of the nationalist and labor movements that shaped much of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

A preference for scientific demonstration rather than political mobilization is, moreover, the strategy of middle-class intellectuals, whose world is defined by the classroom, the computer monitor, and tedious faculty meetings. Political appeals to a people’s cultural and mythic paradigms, on the other hand, are the meat and drink of militants who associate with workers and soldiers, organize local cells and demonstrations, and, when the time comes, raise barricades in the street—to defend their neighborhood from marauders, or perhaps to do what used to be done, in front of Paris’ Hôtel de Ville.

Nine.

The world is not a debating society.

It’s hardly coincidental that Carl Schmitt characterized the liberal, whose ideology distorts his perception of the real, as someone who thinks debate alone in politics suffices.

The politics of the friend/enemy dichotomy is accordingly irrelevant to the liberal, who prefers to reason with the enemy, as he tries to buy him off.

Life/Death, Friend/Enemy: This primordial polarization poses the great political question—the question that brings us to the point where we are compelled to ask ourselves: How are we going to defeat the enemy who threatens our existence?

Contrary to the contention of certain cyber pundits, this is not a matter of deciding who is more intelligent or who commits the most crimes. My commitment to the white nation wouldn’t change even if we were the least intelligent of the races or the most criminally prone.

To defeat the enemy is, rather, a question of deciding what political options are available to us: Will it be a Great Trek to a new homeland; will it be a matter of reviving the heritage of the Borderland Celts, who settled the Indian-occupied frontier and defended the Alamo with rifle in hand; will it involve parliamentary or extraparliamentary actions that mobilize our people; or will it simply be a waiting game, to see how well we can prepare ourselves for the coming crash, when the wolves will be allowed into the very bosom of the city.

Who knows what course awaits us?

The one thing, though, that I hope we can all agree on at this point is the importance of making ourselves ready—by being as independent as possible, by keeping in good physical and mental shape, by ensuring that we are well-located, by knowing who we are and what we stand for—but above all by doing something, anything, in the real world to prefigure what will become the White Nation.

Very little of this, I’m afraid, will have anything to do with marshaling evidence from biological texts—that’s a diversion better left to the liberal modernity whose racial horrors we seek to escape.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 196 other followers