Tag: nationalism

Diversity Will Hunt You Down

This is what it making the coming demographic repairs both inevitable and unavoidable. Because Clown World is aggressively attempting to not only eliminate the right to free association, but every last vestige of the ability of white people to live amongst themselves in the style they prefer:

The British countryside is in the midst of a diversity drive after a government-commissioned report found it was too ‘white’ and ‘middle-class’.

Officials charged with managing some of the country’s best known beauty spots have laid out a series of proposals aimed at attracting minorities.

The plans follow a review, ordered by the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra), which warned the countryside was seen as ‘very much a white environment’ and risked becoming ‘irrelevant’ in a multicultural society.

In the wake of the report, officials representing National Landscapes – including the Cotswolds and Chilterns – have now published a series of management plans that detail their proposals to attract more minority communities. 

The Chiltern National Landscape will launch an outreach programme in Luton and High Wycombe targeted at Muslims.

One factor stopping ethnic minorities visiting was said to be ‘anxiety over unleashed dogs’.

Translation: they’re eventually going to try to ban dogs. I had no idea that leash laws were actually about imposing diversity on people.

The extremists of the younger generations are going to be a bit much for those of us who grew up comfortably indoctrinated in It’s a Small World Disney propaganda. For Generation X, our role is largely going to be to shut up, stay out of their way, and let them get on with fixing the problem as they see fit. Because we all know who their patron saint is going to be, and it isn’t St. George.

DISCUSS ON SG

Oh no! Anyway…

The UN has issued a letter to its 193 member states warning that they face ‘imminent financial COLLAPSE’ after Donald Trump cut US funding.

Whatever shall we do without the satanic globalists trying to lawyer their way into power? It’s a bit of a shock to realize that all of the cartoon villains of the 1970s were the good guys.

DISCUSS ON SG

Blood vs Paper

Kuwait has demonstrated that a nation is more than its past paperwork:

Kuwait has revoked the citizenship of 50,000 individuals believed to lack authentic Kuwaiti bloodlines.

The “dual-citizenship” crackdown has evolved into a “national identity audit” under the direct authority of Emir Sheikh Mishal.

Authorities have even targeted high-profile figures, including the serving Ambassador to the UK, Badr Mohammed Al-Awadhi, and cultural icons such as legendary footballer Ahmed Al-Tarabulsi.

Although only 30% of Kuwait’s 5 million residents are citizens, humanitarian groups warn that up to 200,000 people could ultimately face revocation.

It’s long past time for the USA to conduct a national identity audit. Because the decline and incipient collapse of the political entity demonstrates the absolute importance of maintaining that strong blood-based nationalism without which no nation throughout the course of history has ever survived.

Every single idea based upon the satanic ideals of the Enlightenment has collapsed once tested by reality. It’s obvious that the structures which depend upon those ideals are going to collapse as well.

There is nothing wrong with a little judicious immigration of individuals and families who are of benefit to the nation without altering the society or adulterating it. But mass immigration of the sort we have witnessed over the last 100 years is intrinsically, insidiously, and inevitably destructive in a myriad of ways.

Nationalism is not evil. But mass immigration most certainly is.

DISCUSS ON SG

Immigrants and Their Idea Nation Lie

Vivek Ramaswamy is not, and will never be, an American:

Vivek Ramaswamy has taken to the pages of the New York Times to lecture heritage Americans about what their country really means. According to this son of Indian immigrants—born in 1985 to parents who arrived after the 1965 Immigration Act abolished the national origins system—America is not a nation in any traditional sense. It is an idea. A creed. A set of propositions to which anyone on earth can subscribe and thereby become “every bit as American as a Mayflower descendant.”

This is not history. This is mythology. And it is mythology that serves the interests of those who benefit from the displacement of the historic American nation while providing ideological cover for that displacement.

The idea that America was always a “proposition nation” open to the world is a post-World War II invention. It was manufactured by Jewish intellectuals hostile to the historic American nation and popularized by politicians eager to justify the 1965 Immigration Act that opened the floodgates to the third world. Reagan was not articulating timeless American principles. He was repeating propaganda that had been crafted within living memory.

Vivek’s vision is not merely historically illiterate. It is also incompatible with the Biblical understanding of nationhood.

The only people who believe that America is an idea, and that it can belong to everyone, are the enemies of America. Long before Vivek Ramaswamy was even born, Moammar Qaddafi was saying the same thing: America belongs to everyone, America belongs to the world. More recently the Iranian president, or former Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said much the same thing. He said America is a concept that belongs to the world and no government has the right to tell people that they can’t go and live in the United States.

You’re just an idea and neither your land nor your government belongs to you is not the statement of a friend or ally, much less someone who is actually one of you.

If America is an idea, then how is it that people who observably don’t share or agree with whatever that idea is supposed to be are given passports? And what is that idea, precisely?

DISCUSS ON SG

America is for Everyone

Except Americans and the Europeans who look like them:

There is a peculiar pathology that afflicts white Americans and white Europeans alone among all the peoples of the earth. It is the belief that identity politics is beneath them; that engaging in explicit ethnic advocacy is somehow shameful, distasteful, or morally compromised. They have been taught to believe that the highest virtue is to transcend their own identity, to judge everyone as individuals, to refuse to see patterns or advocate for their own collective interests. Meanwhile, every other group on the planet organizes along ethnic lines, advances ethnic interests, and celebrates ethnic identity without a shred of guilt or hesitation.

This is not a sustainable arrangement. It is, in fact, a formula for extinction.

Let us be clear about what is actually happening in America and throughout the Western world. This is how politics works. It is how it has always worked. Every major demographic group except one practices explicit identity politics. They have advocacy organizations, legal defense funds, congressional caucuses, scholarships, hiring preferences, and media outlets dedicated to advancing their collective interests. They vote as blocs. They network and hire their own. They celebrate their heritage and teach their children to be proud of who they are. None of this is controversial. None of it is condemned. It is understood as natural, healthy, and good.

Black Americans have the NAACP, the Congressional Black Caucus, Black Entertainment Television, historically black colleges, and an entire cultural infrastructure devoted to black advancement. When they advocate for their collective interests, they are celebrated as civil rights heroes continuing a noble legacy. When black politicians openly say they will represent “their people,” no one blinks.

Jewish Americans have the ADL, AIPAC, the American Jewish Committee, and countless other organizations devoted to Jewish identity, Jewish continuity, and Jewish interests. Jewish in-group preference in academia, media, finance, and law is well-documented and openly discussed in Jewish publications. When Jewish groups advocate for Israel or against “antisemitism,” they are exercising ethnic solidarity and no one is permitted to criticize it.

Hispanic Americans have La Raza (now UnidosUS), the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, and an entire political movement built around ethnic identity and ethnic interests. When Hispanic activists openly advocate for more immigration from Latin America to increase Hispanic political power, this is considered legitimate political organizing.

Asian Americans have their own advocacy organizations, their own congressional caucus, their own identity-based scholarships and hiring networks. When Asian parents organize to oppose policies that disadvantage their children, they are exercising ethnic advocacy.

Only one group is forbidden from doing any of this.

I don’t disagree with anything that Torba points out here. But it’s important to remember, and to understand, that the reason this has taken place is because the immigrants – the Germans, the Irish, the Swedes, the Jews – all wanted to be able to feel like they were true blue original Americans no different than the Heritage Americans, the Sons and Daughters of the American Revolution, the Posterity of Plymouth Rock and the Founding Fathers.

And they weren’t. They were never part of the Posterity for whom the Constitution was written and whose rights it guarantees. The Constitution was never intended to protect the rights of every citizen, every resident, every tourist, or every human being on the planet. But since there was plenty of room in the New World, and since everyone didn’t see what harm it would do if everyone pretended to be the same in order to get along, civic nationalism was invented and gradually came to take the place of the real American nationalism.

So, keep in mind that if you’re a non-Posterity American, all that everyone else from Afghanistan to Somalia is doing is the same thing that you, your parents, and your grandparents have been doing for decades, which is pretending that they are Americans. The only real difference is that the cultures, religions, and ethnicities from which you came were similar enough to avoid open and immediate conflict. in the short term.

Even so, these cultural differences between the American nation and immigrants from the European nations were what led to the Civil War and the defeat of the South after the first great wave of immigration. The post-1965 wave is what will lead to what will either be civil war, mass remigration, collapse, or some combination of all three. But regardless of what happens, nothing will ever change the fact that America is a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant nation, and everyone else is just visiting it, or at most, playing tourist while some remnants of it still survive.

There will always be people called “Americans”. After all, Rome still survives as “Romania” to this day. But the modern Romanian is even less related to the Conscript Fathers of the Roman Senate than the average “American” today is related to the Founding Fathers of the American Revolution.

DISCUSS ON SG

The National Security Strategy

It’s far from ideal, but it is a massive improvement upon the destructive path of the entire post-WWII period. (PDF document)

First, a long-overdue condemnation of the foreign-infested elite’s strategy.

American strategies since the end of the Cold War have fallen short—they have been laundry lists of wishes or desired end states; have not clearly defined what we want but instead stated vague platitudes; and have often misjudged what we should want.

After the end of the Cold War, American foreign policy elites convinced themselves that permanent American domination of the entire world was in the best interests of our country. Yet the affairs of other countries are our concern only if their activities directly threaten our interests.

Our elites badly miscalculated America’s willingness to shoulder forever global burdens to which the American people saw no connection to the national interest.

They overestimated America’s ability to fund, simultaneously, a massive welfare-regulatory-administrative state alongside a massive military, diplomatic, intelligence, and foreign aid complex. They placed hugely misguided and destructive bets on globalism and so-called “free trade” that hollowed out the very middle class and industrial base on which American economic and military preeminence depend. They allowed allies and partners to offload the cost of their defense onto the American people, and sometimes to suck us into conflicts and controversies central to their interests but peripheral or irrelevant to our own. And they lashed American policy to a network of international institutions, some of which are driven by outright anti-Americanism and many by a transnationalism that explicitly seeks to dissolve individual state sovereignty. In sum, not only did our elites pursue a fundamentally undesirable and impossible goal, in doing so they undermined the very means necessary to achieve that goal: the character of our nation upon which its power, wealth, and decency were built.

Second, the very first priority listed is to shut down the societally destructive policy of permitting mass immigration. While it falls short of the much-needed policy of mass remigration, it’s clearly pointing in that direction.

The Era of Mass Migration Is Over – Who a country admits into its borders—in what numbers and from where—will inevitably define the future of that nation. Any country that considers itself sovereign has the right and duty to define its future. Throughout history, sovereign nations prohibited uncontrolled migration and granted citizenship only rarely to foreigners, who also had to meet demanding criteria. The West’s experience over the past decades vindicates this enduring wisdom. In countries throughout the world, mass migration has strained domestic resources, increased violence and other crime, weakened social cohesion, distorted labor markets, and undermined national security. The era of mass migration must end. Border security is the primary element of national security. We must protect our country from invasion, not just from unchecked migration but from cross-border threats such as terrorism, drugs, espionage, and human trafficking. A border controlled by the will of the American people as implemented by their government is fundamental to the survival of the United States as a sovereign republic.

And third, the administration still doesn’t comprehend the degree to which China’s military capabilities already dwarf those of the USA from the strategic perspective:

In the long term, maintaining American economic and technological preeminence is the surest way to deter and prevent a large-scale military conflict… We will build a military capable of denying aggression anywhere in the First Island Chain. But the American military cannot, and should not have to, do this alone.

Our allies must step up and spend—and more importantly do—much more for collective defense. America’s diplomatic efforts should focus on pressing our First Island Chain allies and partners to allow the U.S. military greater access to their ports and other facilities, to spend more on their own defense, and most importantly to invest in capabilities aimed at deterring aggression. This will interlink maritime security issues along the First Island Chain while reinforcing U.S. and allies’ capacity to deny any attempt to seize Taiwan or achieve a balance of forces so unfavorable to us as to make defending that island impossible.

There is nothing to maintain. China’s shipbuilding and dronebuilding advantage already exceeds the historical US industrial advantage over Japan. Taiwan and the South China Sea are already gone. So plan accordingly, don’t strategerize about military fantasies.

One hopes this strategic approach will be rather more successful than its predecessor, which in 1992 asserted:

The United States had become the world’s sole remaining superpower following the dissolution of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War, and declared that its principal objective was to preserve that status.

I think we can certainly assess the so-called “Wolfowitz doctrine” as having been complete and comprehensive failure by that metric. Which, of course, what always happens when you let opportunistic tacticians make the strategy.

DISCUSS ON SG

Civilizational Erasure

The White House warns the European politicians that their long-term course is suicidal on a grand scale:

Europe is facing potential “civilizational erasure” as the continent’s policymakers encourage censorship, crack down on political opponents, and turn a blind eye to mass immigration, the new National Security Strategy released by the administration of US President Donald Trump warns.

The landmark and strongly worded document released on Friday says that while the EU is showing worrying signs of economic decline, its cultural and political unraveling poses an even greater threat.

The strategy cites EU-backed immigration policies, suppression of political opposition, curbs on speech, collapsing birthrates, and “loss of national identities and self-confidence,” warning that Europe could become “unrecognizable in 20 years or less.”

One of Washington’s key goals is “cultivating resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations,” the paper adds.

Trump’s strategy notes that the rise of “patriotic European parties” offers “cause for great optimism,” in a reference to growing bloc-wide support for right-wing Euroskeptic parties calling for strict immigration limits.

It’s not exactly a mystery what’s happening when on the one hand, they’re encouraging assisted suicide and sexual self-mutilation and sterilization in the public schools and mass immigration on the other. The only thing that is remarkable is how many people are too stupid and short-sighted to admit what has been happening right in front of them for years, if not decades.

But they’ll fail, sooner or later. They always do. It’s only a question of just how messy the whole thing is going to get before stability is restored. China went through it. Russia went through it. Now it’s the turn of the West to do the same.

The tragedy is that so many people take civilization for granted despite having no concept on what is necessary to maintain it.

DISCUSS ON SG

Vol 2: William Tell

To be honest, the tale from Myths & Legends that precedes this one is actually my favorite from the second volume of the Castalia Junior Classics. But since the story of King Robert of Sicily is too long to post here, we’ll go with this retelling of the central legend of the Confederation Helvetica instead, the inspiring tale of William Tell.

The sale on the complete ten-volume set, which amounts to a 29 percent discount, will continue until midnight tomorrow. And remember, if you’re having any trouble ordering from Arkhaven, please use NDM Express. They’re two entirely different systems, so if one doesn’t work, the other usually will.

Switzerland is a republic, like the United States, and the men who live among its mountains are a brave, free people. But long ago the Emperor of Austria claimed the land as a part of his empire, and sent a man named Gessler to rule the people in his stead.

Gessler was a tyrant. He wished to stand well with his master, the emperor, and he ruled the bold Swiss with a rod of iron. He had soldiers at his command, and he seemed able to do whatever he wished, but there was one thing he could not do: he could not make the proud people bow down to him when he came among them.

He was angry enough at this, and he cast about for some new way in which to make them feel his power. In those days, as now, every town had a public square called a market-place. Here the people flocked to buy and sell of each other. The men and women came down from the mountains with game and cheese and butter. They sold these things in the market, and bought goods which they could not make or grow in their mountain homes.

In the market-place of Altorf, a Swiss town, Gessler set up a tall pole, like a liberty pole. But on the top of this pole he placed his hat, and, just as in the city a gilt crown on some high point was the sign of the emperor’s power, so this hat was to be the sign of Gessler’s power. He bade that every Swiss man, woman, or child who passed by the pole should bow to the hat. In this way they were to show their respect for him.

From one of the mountain homes near Altorf there came into the market-place one day a tall, strong man named William Tell. He was a famous archer, for it was in the days before the mountaineers carried guns, and he was wont to shoot bears and wild goats and wolves with his bow and arrows.

He had with him his little son, and they walked across the market-place. But when they passed the pole, Tell never bent his head. He stood as straight as a mountain pine.

There were servants and spies of Gessler in the market-place, and they at once told the tyrant how Tell had defied him. Gessler commanded the Swiss to be brought before him, and he came, leading by the hand his little son.

“They tell me you shoot well,” said the tyrant. “You shall not be punished. Instead you shall give me a sign of your skill. Your boy is no doubt made of the same stuff you are. Let him stand yonder a hundred paces off. Place an apple on his head, and do you stand here and pierce the apple with an arrow from your quiver.”

All the people about turned pale with fear, and fathers who had their sons with them held them fast, as if Gessler meant to take them from them. But Tell looked Gessler full in the face, and drew two arrows from his quiver.

“Go yonder,” he said to the lad, and he saw him led away by two servants of Gessler, who paced a hundred steps, and then placed an apple on the boy’s head. They had some pity for Tell in their hearts, and so they had made the boy stand with his back to his father.

“Face this way,” rang out Tell’s clear voice, and the boy, quick to obey, turned and stood facing his father. He stood erect, his arms hanging straight by his side, his head held up, and the apple poised on it. He saw Tell string his bow, bend it, to try if it were true, fit the notch of the arrow into the taut cord, bring the bow slowly into place. He could see no more. He shut his eyes.

The next moment a great shout rose from the crowd. The arrow had split the apple in two and had sped beyond. The people were overjoyed, but Gessler said in a surly tone to Tell:

“You were not so very sure of your first shot. I saw you place a second arrow in your belt.”

“That was for thee, tyrant, had I missed my first shot,” said Tell.

“Seize him!” cried the enraged tyrant, and his soldiers rushed forward, but the people also threw themselves upon the soldiers, and Tell, now drawing his bow again, shot the tyrant through the heart, and in the confusion that followed, taking his boy by the hand, fled quickly to the lake near by, and, loosing a boat, rowed to the other shore, and so escaped to the mountain fastness.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Return of Christian Nationalism

Andrew Torba has a new site up, and I have to say, he appears to have refined his thinking on the subject in a correct and positive manner as opposed to the civic nationalism that had crept into his book on the subject.

THE CHRISTIAN IDENTITY OF AMERICA

Christian Nationalism is not a new invention; it is a return to our true heritage. For centuries, America was explicitly Christian in law, custom, and identity.

WHY WE REJECT THE TERM “JUDEO-CHRISTIAN”

The term “Judeo-Christian” is a modern political invention, not a biblical one. It functions as a vague civil-religious umbrella that papers over real theological differences.

Christianity is not an extension of modern Judaism; it is the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets through Jesus Christ.

The New Testament repeatedly teaches that the Church—not unbelieving Israel—is the continuation of God’s covenant people. Christian Nationalism is therefore Christian, not interfaith. We affirm the Lordship of Jesus Christ, the authority of the New Testament, and the mission of discipling the nations.

He’s absolutely correct. The differences are not just real and theological, they are fundamental and represent polar opposites. The term itself is not merely a contradiction, it is an oxymoron. While the values of the European Union are, without question, “talmudic” as stated by the EU’s High Priestess, Ursula van der Leyen, the values of Western civilization, the European nations, and America are 100 percent opposed to that satanic globalist babelism, the evil fruits of which are conclusively in evidence today.

The great Swiss Christian nationalist Gonzague de Reynold addressed this very contradiction between the Satanic elevation of the State over Man and nation on the one hand and the Christian elevation of Man’s soul over the State in 1938:

The notion of the common good has its source in the Christian conception of Man, and here is how it can be defined: the ensemble of natural and human conditions that permit man to live according to the needs of the individual, but according to the demands of the person, in order to accomplish his destiny which is to cross earthly life to assimilate himself to God. Thus, the common good must have ceaselessly before its eyes this last end of our human associations, this final and total perfection of our human being.

All earthly things are below the human soul. But it is certain that the human soul, as long as it remains incarnate, needs these things, and that the vital impulse takes in these things its point of departure. They must therefore be ordered to the human soul, to the person.

And this order is called civilization.

DISCUSS ON SG