Print this post Print this post

Against Individualism 

1,546 words

It has been opined in past issues of this magazine that man’s most dangerous myth is that of equality: the myth which, in its starkest form, says that every featherless biped, regardless of race, gender, or lineage, has essentially the same physical-psychical constitution and the same set of capabilities as every other, and that differences in performance are attributable solely to unequal environmental influences and unequal opportunities.

In other words, there is no reason except “sexism” why very few women are test pilots, homicide detectives, or industrial pioneers—and why correspondingly few men win quilting contests or choose nursing as a profession.

Likewise, “racism” is the sole valid explanation for the overabundance of Negro basketball players and welfare recipients, and for the dearth of chess masters and physicists of the same race.

And, of course, the best way to run a nation is to let everyone have an equal say in public affairs, because people all have about the same innate intelligence, character, and sense of responsibility.

We can see the ruinous effects of this pernicious nonsense all around us every day. It is destroying the long-established relationship of complementarity between men and women; it is destroying the family as an institution; it is destroying our culture; it has already destroyed our civic life, for all practical purposes; and it threatens to destroy our race.

Because we can see these things, there is no doubt among us about the danger of the myth of equality. But there is another myth abroad, which is the more dangerous because it has beguiled many of those who have seen most clearly that there is no equality of constitution or capability in the world—not between men and women or between Blacks and Whites or between men of good breeding and the misbegotten. This other myth is the one that says: Because people are unequal in their predispositions and their aptitudes, the course of wisdom is to judge each person only as an individual, and not as a member of a gender, a race, or a family.

Unfortunately, this myth—let us call it the myth of individuality—has become as fashionable on the right side of the ideological spectrum as the myth of equality has on the left side. It has its adherents among the very bright as well as the very dim.

One of America’s foremost scientists, long a battler in the front lines against the minions of the equality myth, often is denounced as a “racist” by his opponents because of his assertions that Blacks, on the average, are less intelligent than Whites, and that the difference is innate. He has replied, “I am a raceologist, but I am not a racist.” He has then gone on to say that he judges everyone, Black or White, only as an individual.

Another very bright man, a eugenicist who founded and operates a sperm bank in order to increase the number of offspring of Nobel Prize winners and other exceptionally intelligent men, has fended off the suspicions of news reporters that he, too, may be a racist by assuring them that he is looking for any intelligent sperm donors, regardless of race, and that he will gladly accept sperm from a qualified Black; i.e., a Black with an IQ of 160 is just as desirable a progenitor of the next generation as a White of the same IQ.

At the other end of the scale is the Southerner who fondly remembers a bygone era of institutionalized racial segregation, with its patron-client relationship between middle-to-upper-class Whites and their Black servants and employees. He is quick to condemn Black violence and Black welfare loafing, but he is just as quick to praise law-abiding, hard-working Blacks who “know their place.” He is happy to offer employment to Blacks of the latter type, even without being forced to do so by the Federal government’s “civil rights” bloodhounds, and he takes pride in the fact that he harbors none of the racial animosity found so often in lower-class Whites, who feel more directly threatened by Black economic and social advances.

The myth of individuality is more insidious than the myth of equality, because, whereas the latter has no basis whatsoever in fact, the former can be bolstered with facts galore: It is a fact that some Blacks are more intelligent or more trustworthy than some Whites and, therefore, may make more profitable employees; it is a fact that some women have performed quite well as test pilots; [1] it is a fact that there are a few Jews who care little or nothing for money, do not despise all who were not born into their tribe, and are genuinely appalled at the behavior and attitudes of the great mass of their kinsmen. The egalitarian ideologue is easily proved a liar, a fool, or both; but the man who judges everyone only as an individual can back his judgment with reason.

To be sure, the reason is not unassailable: it is reason which stands only in an individualist vacuum and fails to take account of a larger reality. For example, everyone understands that in a war the course of wisdom is not to judge men as individuals, but only according to the uniforms they wear. The soldier who reasoned that some of the troops in the opposing army might have no hostility in their hearts and actually might be much nicer fellows than many of his own comrades-in-arms—and who concluded from this that he would make his decisions about whom to shoot solely on the basis of individual judgments, without regard to uniforms or nationalities—would not last long.

And we certainly are in a war—a war without uniforms, but nevertheless one in which a glance ordinarily tells to which army a soldier belongs. At least, it tells those who have not had their brains addled by the myth of equality or the myth of individuality. The soldiers on the other side don’t have that problem.

To the Jew, the Black, the militant feminist, the homosexual, or the Hispanic, what is of paramount importance about any individual is whether or not he is one of the “chosen,” a “soul brother,” a woman, a fellow queer, or a member of la raza, respectively. He always knows to which army he belongs.

Being conscious of group characteristics does not necessarily imply hostility, of course. In particular, consciousness of the profound and fundamental gender differences between men and women is a prerequisite to the mutual appreciation of the sexes for one another necessary to a healthy society. It has been the shrill insistence of an abnormal and disturbed few that these differences be ignored—and the acquiescence to those few by a feckless, opportunistic, or confused many—which has caused much of the hostility, resentment, and suspicion which now exist between the sexes.

It is the real world in which we must survive—a world in which race and gender are determinative characteristics telling us more about the nature of an individual than any other features by which we might judge him—not the make-believe world of the individualist, in which we are supposed to ignore all features identifying an individual as a member of a group having those features in common. The man who ignores relevant evidence for the sake of politeness—or for fear of being thought a “racist” or a “sexist”—puts himself at a competitive disadvantage in evaluating those about him. That’s no way to win a war.

And it’s no way to build a future for our race. If Whites regard themselves and others only as individuals, while non-Whites maintain their racial consciousness, then eventually the non-Whites will inherit the earth.

There always have been irresponsible individuals among us, willing to advance their own welfare at the expense of unborn generations of their racial kinsmen. But never before has such behavior been regarded as virtuous; never before have the intellectual leaders of a race accepted it as the norm.

Ignoring the real world and playing by make-believe rules is a poor survival strategy even for the individual wholly devoid of racial consciousness. For a race it is a guaranteed path to extinction—and not just because it is a strategy which ignores some of the evidence needed in making decisions.

Just as an army will not win its battles unless its soldiers put the goals and interests of the army as a whole, and not just their private interests as individuals, into their decision-making, a race will not win the competitive struggle with other races for existence unless its members—and especially its intellectual and moral leaders—habitually think of themselves and others in racial terms and act accordingly.

It is the ineluctable responsibility of every White man and woman who claims to stand for racial progress to free his mind of the last vestige of the myth of individuality.


1. One of the most outstanding test pilots who has lived, male or female, and certainly the greatest woman test pilot, was Hanna Reitsch (1912–1979), who flew the world’s first turbojet, pulsejet, and rocket-propelled aircraft. Interestingly enough, she flew for a government which, according to popular mythology, was the most oppressively “sexist” which has existed in recent times. A dedicated National Socialist, she also was a remarkably attractive and feminine woman.

Source: National Vanguard, no. 100, May 1984, pp. 2, 4, 7.

This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , , , , , . Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  1. WG
    Posted January 25, 2011 at 6:05 am | Permalink

    Great essay. Please allow me to vent a little. I do wish that tubby little momma’s boy out of Alabama with the pudding bowl haircut would stop taking swipes at Counter-Currents. I’m sick and tired of reading his envy-stained screeds, so I have decided to stop visiting. With “friends” like that, do we need enemies? It makes we wonder if he is in the pay of the SPLC. Seriously. At C-C we are treated to essays by Greg Johnson, William Pierce, Jonathan Bowden, Alex Kurtagic, Dominique Venner, Kevin MacDonald, and a variety of other serious thinkers. Over at OD, the pieces are repetitive, dull, unoriginal, and downright uninspiring. His characterization of what he calls the “Vanguardists” is meant to appeal to fellow hayseeds and Fox News addicts, which is why IMO his latest articles appear more like performance than serious analysis. OD is vaudeville. It’s a joke. Here’s wishing that every article published at C-C makes him reach for another box of donuts.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted January 25, 2011 at 9:11 am | Permalink

      HW has vowed yet again to stop being negative and divisive and start being constructive. So he proposes that he and his readers in Wyoming (both of them) go to work gaming the system there better than the business lobby, the left, and the churches so they can get an Arizona-style immigration enforcement law passed. How’s that for realism?

      It may be harder to resist than another donut, but let’s not give HW and OD (and don’t we all feel that we’ve had an OD of HW?) any more attention here.

  2. Fourmyle of Ceres
    Posted January 25, 2011 at 6:43 pm | Permalink

    Pierce – and Kevin Alfred Strom – wrote and spoke eloquently of the fundamental issues and difficulties we faced at the racial level. Our most effective opposition is totally organized at the racial level, while we continue to accept our oppositions “suggestions,” repeated in all manner of media, to seek our own personal pleasure at the expense of any purposeful group activity whatsoever.

    The next step is to define what an ideal racially conscious community should look like for us, and our posterity, and its instrument of expansion?

    Consider the basic ideas defined by Rockwell – political effectiveness in the status quo – compared to the basic idea defined by Rockwell’s acolyte, Pierce – “White Archipelagoes,” in Pierce’s term. The logical extension of these would seem to be Covington’s Northwest Republic (then and now the best analytical model for what our ethnostate would actually look like), and from there, to the possible conceptions of Faye’s dynamic futurism.

    The tremendous response Pierce must have had to “Our Cause” inspired him to form a “new” religion, manifesting the spiritual dynamics that are at the foundation of where our religion came from, while laying the new foundation for where our religion must go, not binding us “back,” but binding us, and our posterity, FORWARD.

    Thus, racethink works best when it leads to better racial outcomes in all areas of the Culture.

    What scares our opponents more than anything is the idea that we might go to where they can not follow, to a much better place that we and our posterity will have willfully created.

    “It is not by accident” that our best writers use the framework of what is called “science fiction” to describe what might soon be criminal to describe in more immediate, temporal terms.

    Or, to paraphrse Orwell, “Some people can engage in racethink because some races are more equal than others.”

    The take home lesson is simple:

    When we define our agenda in the broadest of racial terms, spanning millenia if need be, our agenda becomes the defining foundation for the fulfillment of a unique, transcendent, personal – and racial – destiny.

    We can learn from this.

    • Posted January 25, 2011 at 7:11 pm | Permalink

      Fourmyle of Ceres,

      You have put meta-politics in a nutshell.

      • Fourmyle of Ceres
        Posted January 26, 2011 at 8:26 pm | Permalink

        It is all well and good to look at the best writing Pierce and Kevin Alfred Strom had to offer.

        At worst, their writing is always clean, clear, and insightful.

        At best, their work is inspiring; Pierce’s “Our Cause, ” and Kevin Alfred Strom’s “Toward The Stars.”

        That their best work stands the test of time so well, in spite of the lack of a positive future for Pierce’s organization, says something I think needs a lot more discussion, or perhaps, clarity of thought, united with a new clarity of purpose.

        I was just reading Savitri, and what separates her writings from the writings of all others is this: she has a relentless, unbounded confidence that we were right, we are right, and time will prove us to be more correct as time rolls on.

        In the midst of the total destruction of the NSDAP Cultural Moment, she was relentlessly positive that those leaders, those manifestations of the best of the race, will be vindicated in the fulness of time.

        “We’re Going To WIN” – a mere reflection of Saviti’s overwhelmingly well-informed, relentless sense of self-confidence in her thinking, and us, at our best, might be a term we should dwell on more often, and then focus our lives purposefully as to how we can make that happen.

        Incidentally, note that Savitri almost always manifested the cosmic perspective that Pierce manifested only at his best.

        I don’t want this to devolve into a “my teacher is better than your teacher” meaningless, counter-productive discussion.

        Rather, I offer it as further proof that Pierce, at his best – “Our Cause,” which inspired such heartfelt response that he felt compelled to create a new religion, and Kevin Alfred Strom, at his best – “Toward The Stars” – focused us on the higher contexts in which he live our lives, and called us forward to, in the words of the Call of Harold Covington’s Northwest Republic to its citizens, “Do Better.”

        Savitri never lost faith in us, and the possibilities we could manifest in our lives, as we transformed talents into capacities, and obstacles into opportunities. Considering she was looking at the rubble the NSDAP Cultural Moment’s Manifestation has been blasted into, she provides an example for all of us.

        We can learn from this.

        After all,

        We’re Going To WIN

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Our Titles

    White Identity Politics

    The World in Flames

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    From Plato to Postmodernism

    The Gizmo

    Return of the Son of Trevor Lynch's CENSORED Guide to the Movies

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    Venus and Her Thugs


    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics


    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles


    The Node

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Gold in the Furnace