Anthony van Dyck, “Charles I, King of England, from Three Angles,” 1636
1,783 words
German translation here
Matt Parrott’s “Ideas Matter” is a superb and thought-provoking piece.
Certainly, American style democracy is a vulgar and disastrous thing. It has to go. However, I’m not convinced that democracy is the problem per se. Swiss style direct democracy has considerable promise, of course with plenty of modifications to suit our particular needs.
When I look at small group or “micro” direct democracy, the results seem good enough. The local homeowners and neighborhood associations can run themselves adequately. There are plenty of examples of small and medium scale cooperatives that seem to do fine. Employee-owned businesses also do well enough.
The evidence suggests to me that, so long as we are talking about homogenous white communities, decentralized direct democracy has a lot going for it. The evidence also suggests that direct democracy generally leads to more “conservative” results than those offered by the elites. If we had decentralized direct democracy for the last two centuries, would we be in our present dire straits? It’s an interesting question, but I can’t help but speculate that things would be far and away better.
As a white nationalist, I try to think in terms of centuries and millenia. My primary concern is the long-term survival of our people. Yet, when all is said and done, my worldview is no doubt colored greatly by the time in which I live, the reality and experience of the present age.
What is that present experience? It is one in which our elites are, at best, utterly indifferent to our plight. More often they are hostile to our cause, actively working to dispossess our people. If, instead of treating the elites as a single amorphous blob, we break them down into particular categories, the picture becomes even more stunning. It’s not just that the conservative elite sold us out, or the business elite, or the university elite, or the media elite, or the military elite, or the Catholic elite, or even the Baptist elite (typing those last two words together pained me, by the way). It’s that EVERY elite sold us down the river. Every last one. Not a single institutional elite will stand up for us.
So, shock of shocks, I’m more than a little wary of “elites,” even though I am an elitist . . . if you get my meaning.
I consider the serious thinkers of white nationalism to be a natural elite, a real elite, and the most important elite on the planet. But can that be instutionalized? In perpetuity? I have my doubts. But that is the elite that I am interested in.
My point is that institutions can be captured and controlled. But always and forever, it would seem, there arises in the folk at least a minority that can see through the corruption. And when that minority (us, at present) speaks out, what do we find? Every institutional elite opposes us, but many of our folk agree with what we say. Even after being subjected to a saturation level of propaganda, I continue to regularly run into normal white citizens that have sound and healthy instincts. To the extent that I get any sort of positive reinforcement whatsoever, it is from the folk, not any institutional elite.
I believe this is organic and natural. I have no reason to doubt that, assuming our race survives in any significant numbers, a thousand years from now it will still produce people like us. There will be someone similar to Matt Parrott. There will be someone similar to Greg Johnson, etc.
Hippolyte (Paul) Delaroche, “Cromwell before the Coffin of Charles I,” 1849
So yes, this joke called American democracy must go. Further, the coming White Republic will initially require draconian powers in order to punish or expel the anti-whites and traitors in our midst, and to crush the institutional elites that are leading us to the abattoir.
“Smash the Left. Smash Capitalism!”
Until we reach the day when a decent number of people would “get it” if you put that slogan on a sign, we haven’t gotten very far. But I digress. Point is, during the transition period, we’ve got plenty of work cut out for ourselves.
We will have to rebuild our institutions from the ground up. Let’s treat that as a given, and now look to the long term.
Here is what makes the most sense to me, once we get past the transition:
1. Decentralized direct democracy.
2. Founding charter of White Republic to be explicitly racial in nature, guaranteeing that the land shall be reserved for our people (and defining our people) exclusively and for all time, and that each generation of whites is a steward in this capacity. No generation, or even a series of generations, has the right to give our land to non-whites. It is not theirs to give in such a way, but belongs to whites and only whites, including generations as yet unborn. Any vote or decision to the contrary is null and void, and armed resistance against it is justified. This part of the charter is permanent and may not be amended. Throw in something similar to Lane’s 14 Words for good measure. “The purpose of this government is to secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.”
3. An explicit and affirmative duty to rebel, by whatever means necessary, if either an elite or even a majority of white citizens attempts to betray the responsibility of stewardship. The duty would be to expel the alien invaders as well as bring the white traitors to justice for treason.
4. Every jury to be informed of its right to nullification. Further, killing traitors should be an affirmative defense. Let peers judge. Point is, make it personally dangerous to be a traitor. Perhaps revive code duello in some form, a la Covington.
5. Graduated franchise, with a citizen earning more votes as he demonstrates greater responsibility and service to the folk. Even if it is set up, as it probably should be, so that most citizens will likely get all of the votes in due time (property ownership, marriage, progeny, military service), the graduated franchise is necessary to destroy the idea that every opinion is equal to every other. It isn’t. Those who have more at stake, those who have demonstrated more responsibility, and those who have rendered service to the folk are entitled to a greater say. Still have universal suffrage in that everybody gets one vote for simply being a white citizen in good standing.
6. Oaths of loyalty to be taken to the folk, and to the government only insofar as it protects the continuity of the folk. The government is merely a tool, the purpose of which is to protect the folk. The folk is the actual object of loyalty, and this should be explicit. I believe that Alex Linder once mentioned requiring people to sign a written contract acknowledging that the racial basis of the nation will never be changed. Might be a good idea.
7. Revive ostracism and exile. Those who speak out against the continuity of our people are no longer entitled to live in the White Republic. Leave. We can learn a lot from the Amish in this respect. We are a people who I believe require a great deal of freedom and latitude. But we are also a particular community with a particular purpose, and we should not allow termites in human form to undermine that in the name of freedom. The termites will be free — to leave.
8. Candidates for public office held to the highest of those requirements stated above, and perhaps others as well. Not to mention term limits, public financing of campaigns, open primaries, etc. Eliminate all party strangleholds on power. If someone wants to consider himself a member of a particular party, that’s his business. But parties will lose control of the choke points that they have today, and may not exist at all absent those choke points (hopefully). Even if they do continue to exist in recognizable form, they will have far less power if the citizenry is free to reverse any decision by calling for a direct vote.
9. Take a similar approach as above with anything that is “big,” whether it is Big University, Big Media, or Big Business. If you’re going to be so big that you inherently overwhelm the power of the typical citizen, then the white citizenry as a whole must have some sort of check upon you, including ordering your dissolution and sale, or revoking your charter. In a healthy society, this power of the citizenry will rarely if ever be used, but never again can we allow our own domestic institutions to be captured and turned against us, while we have no means of recourse. Small and medium sized entities would be exempt from this, though of course their owners would be subject to the requirements of stewardship like any other citizen.
10. Revive, through the above means and others, an honor-based society. There must be real consequences to being a dishonorable traitor to one’s folk. There also must be more to life than just making a buck and stuffing as many pies into our mouths as possible. With honor, on the other hand, we honor not only ourselves and our families, but our people — both its history and its future.
I could go on and on, but you get the idea. So sure, let’s institutionalize a pro-white elite to the extent that we can. The coming White Republic will, by definition, have that. It will have its own media elite, university elite, etc. But unless we have a society where traitors can reasonably expect some midnight justice, our people will always be in peril. Unless we have a society in which the white citizenry can provide a real check on corruption, our people will always be vulnerable. It’s just too easy for anyone with real money to capture institutions, and therefore the elites of those institutions. We must have a society where there is no real point in doing such a thing, because both the institution as an institution, and the elites as individuals, will be held to account.
Despite the terrible state of our people today, they are still more sound than our false elites. The future White Republic, or so it seems to me, should attempt to harness that force and encourage that natural strength, as a check against the corruption of elites. Our life experience shows us that, like it or not, we’re the last man standing, so to speak. By definition, therefore, we are the most resilient.
29 comments
Perhaps it would be good to ponder the idea of a council of elders. By this I mean a group of lifetime-committed, learned, ascetic (renouncing wealth, property, etc.) men to be something along the lines of an advisory committee to elected officials and a sort of “supreme court” where matters of highest importance could be taken. I think the ascetic aspect must be of paramount importance to serve as a check on corruption and a sign of absolute commitment to the nation as a whole. A spiritual guide for good governance.
The “council of elders” works, judging by the results achieved by the kahal.
A council of elders is an idea I’ve not heard put forth as our solution before. Sounds good and I’ll have to think it over. Maybe a few quailifications other than age should be added. Having raised families, been middle class all their lives (cuts out the greed/corrupiton part), would likely be good.
If we’ve not got the Jewish question resolved genetic test for less than 1/8th Jewish ancestry would be a no brainer.
The main thing would be an explicit statement in a second declaration of independence as Matt rights, that we are for the European sub-race. Also a statement that cultural control by Jews and other market dominant minorities will always have to be defended against. They’ve proved they can control from over seas. Remember Iceland.
That we are explicitly founded for people of virtually pure European descent should also be in the legal part of the document but the legal section is in more danger of being amended than the philosophical part is of being erased from history.
I’m not too comfortable with the “midnight justice” and “killing traitors is an afirmative defense”. If that were necessary it would probably be because we had either lost control of our future or were dangerously close to it. And for the next 25 years we need to be culturally marketable to the awakening white masses. Talk of midnight justice and such on our web sites is not a good idea.
The founders gave us an excellent start with the bill of rights. It was enshrined in our peoples hearts which is the only reason we still have it. We are pratically the only white nation that still has relatively free speech and the right to bear arms.
I agree with a fair amount of what was said. And if it came down to it, I would fight for this White Republic. That aside, I still think Trainspotter is suffering from the delusion that the masses (yes; even the masses of white people) are competent enough to make the kind of decisions that require putting off short-term gain for long-term goals.
Think about it, would you trust the masses of white people voting—voting directly—on what the future is for the white race? Let’s even pretend it’s proportional, with education, marriage, military service, etc. giving more voting privilege. Would you trust them then? Even if the only voters were explicitly pro-white citizens of a white republic, I still wouldn’t trust them to make the intelligent, selfless, innovative kind of decisions resulting in (unpopular and) ascetic growing pains necessary for the long-term good of our race. I mean, look at the White Nationalist movement in America; can you even begin to picture what kind of idiocy we would be subjected to if we allowed them to democratically make decisions? We’d end up in some kind of Libertarian nightmare mixed with conservatism and the kind of base racism that is so easily proven ignorant and false by higher elements of every people on this planet.
James Hart articulated an argument against democracy well when he said,
(Quote from Favored Races chapter V “The Eugenic Manifesto”: http://www.jameshartforcongress.com/prometheus/chapV.htm )
It is true that the masses of white people tend to be and vote conservatively. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Well, I think it is a bit of both. It is a fact that a lot of the masses of white people have good instincts. The problem is, having good instincts doesn’t translate into the kind of intelligence necessary to running a country, let alone planning the future of your race.
Base racism is a good instinct for lower-classes/elements to have (I’m speaking of organic caste here, not financial classes). In fact, every people has this, and it can’t be helped. Even with everything that has been invested in brainwashing our people, the Jewish elite and their lackeys still aren’t able to stamp it out in whites. But base racism/prejudice is not a good thing for an elite to possess.
Human instincts (which aren’t of equal value in themselves) have varying degrees of value when it comes to an elite, the mid-level classes/castes, and so on. Even the most simple caste/class needs to have a certain amount of control and ability to override natural human instincts. The higher in organic caste one gets, the more one needs to be able to control and redirect instincts into serving the long-term good (and finding healthy ways to release those that can’t be redirected). That is one important ability that distinguishes humans from other kinds of life: we can act against the basic instinct of instant gratification to realize long-term goals. And not all people can do this equally. Our elite needs to be characterized first by unparallelled and selfless dedication and loyalty to our folk and its future and than by very high levels of intelligence, asceticism, and long-sightedness (for lack of a better word).
I think we should restore the Republican democracy we started with. Rule by an elite is one of four stages ancient historians noted.
The natural cycle seems to be a republic, pure democracy, despotism and an aristocratic elite. Then the cycle starts all over again.
If we can stop this short of Barry becoming dictator then we will have temporarily escaped the last historical stage. If we ever got deep into the despot stage it would probably be too late for our race.
So if we are to be able to reverse the historical process long enough to get an explicit “whites only” hard wired into our constitution and into our peoples affections
we are going to need a third of the population with us.
That being said we shouldn’t be making public statements about the stupidity of the masses and the need for midnight violence.
My sister is a blue-eyed blond at about mensa level but hasn’t the slightest concern about white survival. I’m only at the 96% i.q. level but here I am working my a** off for our people.
Somebody stole the 14 words magnetic signs off my car yesterday. It may have been the cops for all I know. We need to start organizing local pro-white communities where that kind of ting won’t happen. If we can’t get at least that far first there isn’t going to be a white republic.
As was written 90 years ago we need numerous practical experimental projects on the ground like AP3 and PLE’s or what have you. Among the leaders of these disparate projects will arise another political genius who will demonstrate what is going to work this time.
Phil,
You didn’t really respond with any arguments for why we should perpetuate democracy or why I was wrong. You just said, “I think . . . ”
Why? Do you think the masses are going to come on to Counter-Currents and read the comment section on this article and get offended? My comment wasn’t propaganda aimed at converting the masses; it was an argument aimed at white people intelligent and interested enough to be reading the comment section of this article. I hate to break it to you, but most white Americans can barely read a block of text for content and the large majority of those who can don’t do it when they don’t have to. An even smaller minority is interested in the kind of heretical information being discussed here. We are by no means talking to the masses here.
Where did I say anything about “the need for midnight violence”??
Intelligence doesn’t translate into character.There are tons of smart white people who are scum, and their are plenty of very honest, loyal white people of relatively low intelligence. On the whole, character, integrity, and loyalty are more important than intelligence but that doesn’t change the fact that those in charge must be highly intelligent.
Agreed.
What? You mean a single person? But…that’s so anti-democratic! Are you saying the masses can’t be the political genius? Are you insulting the masses? You really shouldn’t be making public declarations like that. (I couldn’t help myself)
But in all seriousness, I sure hope so. The only problem is that WNism in America has made almost no progress. What does over a half-century of the WN movement in America have to show? Almost nothing. We’ve had William Pierce, Revilo P. Oliver, and maybe Commander Rockwell (and he did a lot to hurt WNism and esp. National Socialism even though he was a good, intelligent man). Yockey can’t be counted since he came right out of the ashes of WWII and was alive during it. None of these men, however great they were, have been the messiah-like “political genius” who is going to save us all that you seem to believe in. We can’t put our hopes in the idea that someone will come and save us. I think it would be more likely (but not certain by any means) that a true archetypal leader would emerge from within pro-white communities, if we ever build them. If not, I would hope that we would at least produce something like a political elite who could adequately work under such a leader. Remember, a great leader can’t do much when the best he’s got to work with are stupid or have no character.
In any case, we needn’t to worry about a mysterious “political genius.” We should be concerned with fighting the cultural war, primarily by building communities of racially aware families in the Northwest and creating a distinct identity unique and separate from the American identity. Our children should share a strong common identity and dream, a superior education, a marked resilience, and a disgust of everything that America is and stands for.
“Numbers and fertility do not imply a divine right to rule.”
Not a divine right, but an ecological one — before which ‘the divine’ has a rather unheroic way of retreating.
No, not really.
Graduated Citizenship. I’ve talked about it until I was blue in the face and not one person has ever gotten it. It takes imagination – and there is no first class intellect without it. Thus I fear for our people – they lack the imagination to envision a new order. It will have to be imposed from above. The New Republic will be hierarchical to the core. Nothing is more disastrous than control by the mass man – the majority of whom are women who vote their feelings and personal interests..
Trainspotter’s comments on democracy remind me of what James N. Wood wrote in Democracy and the Will to Power (New York: Knopf, 1921):
“All democracies are affected by a further force, unexpressed, but present in each, to wit, tradition. This is the sum of the rights and privileges supposed to attach to the individual, forming a body of natural rights beyond the scope of law, a resisting quantity to which law conforms itself. These rights are readily detected in a given political body, and their extent always defines the limits beyond which legislation is resented. Liberty, as an intelligible expression, is embraced by them, for the spirit of independence in a given order always manifests itself by an insistence on the recognition of such rights. This is the unwritten constitution of the inferior group in all societies, and it is rarely threatened, save where the general will force has declined. This is an important observation. The aggressive power of the inferior group not only defines its own strength and importance; it likewise determines the quality of the ruling factions, when compared with those of other societies. From passive collectivities great men do not arise, and it is therefore the constant aim of inferior minds to lower the standard of individual aggressiveness. By this means the liberty of lower types is assured.
“Traditional rights are racial; that is, they define the virility of masses, their masculinity and forcefulness. The liberalism of English customs does not trace to Magna Charta, for nothing is less justified than the exaggerated importance attached to that document. It results from the stubbornness, the brutality, of the basic Englishman. . . . The consequences of this brutality in English life have been, on the whole, beneficial. Primarily, it has led to a certain deference to individual liberty that has conferred on the race a deserved reputation for liberalism. But on the other hand, it has fathered a dominant caste of great acumen and power, for the reason that real skill and courage were requisite to mastering and directing a stubborn people. The gradual decline of this pristine vigour can alone lead to the fall of the race.”
Wood points to another conception of democracy, one based upon “the virility of masses, their masculinity and forcefulness” rather than elections and parliamentary institutions. This kind of democracy can coexist with aristocracy. As I think Greg Johnson pointed out in an interview with Robert Stark, classical republicanism favors a mixed constitution. A polity can have monarchical, aristocratic, and democratic elements in its written or unwritten constitution.
In Aristocracy and the Meaning of Class Rule (London: C. W. Daniel, 1931), Philip Mairet corrects a common misconception of aristocracy:
“In common usage, the word Aristocracy has acquired a somewhat regrettable limitation. It has come to connote a single class ruling over any others that there may be, and (especially since the age of Democratic criticism) it suggests a relationship between power and impotence. Such an Aristocracy would only be tyranny, and a negation of its name. A successful ruling class is never related to the other classes merely as the hammer to the anvil. There is always a gradation of classes, with gradation of power; and a marked distribution of real dignities, privileges and powers has distinguished every polity which can be regarded as aristocratic in its nature.”
Aristocracy involves the articulation of power rather than its concentration or its equalization.
It may be worthwhile to synthesize classical republicanism with White republicanism.
History proves that democracy is in our DNA. Whites are one of the few races capable of it, and that biological tendency won’t be suppressed, even in the name of some future guarded by some pro-white elite.
The first step obviously is a major sea change in racial self-awareness. Racial awakening. From there, all else follows.
Then, the challenge becomes making more aspects of white society democratic. The obvious next needed step, historically speaking, is economic democracy. Sure, it exists here and there, but racially awakened whites will need a lot more of it. They will clamor for it, as it will be the path towards unleashing their pent up creativity and achieving a quality of life up to that point unseen on the planet.
Some outlines of this future can be seen in the present. There are several implicit whitopias with advanced levels of economic democracy already in existence. The obvious missing ingredient being racial consciousness, of course. These whitopias teeter on the brink of losing it all, not understanding how important their whiteness is. Let’s hope they wake up in time as their experience will be instrumental in the post-awakening era. They will likely lead by example.
At any rate, racial consciousness is the larger challenge. Once achieved, it strikes me as not so hard to convince people that socialism (or socialist-like forms of organization) works best in racially and ethnically homogenous contexts. The proof is there historically, and a racially awakened people flush with a newborn sense of solidarity will want it anyway.
From there it’s just a matter of letting white people be white, that is, getting out of the way and letting them refine the techniques of self-organization as really only white people can.
The waxings and wanings of power concentrating and being dismantled will be ongoing, I imagine, as I’m skeptical of static, perfect utopias. So rather than trying to come up with specific systems, laws, rules, and regulations, I will go with the simple maxim of “democracy, plus even more democracy,” the idea being that white people at the height of their realization as intelligent autonomous individuals with a deep sense of traditional solidarity, will be able to rise to every challenge, including the threat of white elites who threaten to throw it all away, yet again.
History hardly shows that democracy is in our DNA. It shows that democracy has only ever taken root in a civilization that was in decline. One could argue that history shows monarchy and aristocracy are also in our DNA, and these having been in place when our civilizations were at their zeniths.
Europe, and therefore, White people, have become so afflicted with the spiritual syphilis they suffer today because democratic principles of global fraternity, equality, anti-hierarchy, anti-religiosity and anti-spirituality, and the various other polar opposites of Traditional principles, have paved the way for it. Mankind is by nature hierarchical, whether we are comparing different races or different groups of people within races. To say that democracy can work provided the nation is 100% White and 100% racially aware is a bit naive, no offense. It’s similar to the argument that if we simply remove the Jews from power then the system will correct itself automatically. There HAVE to be other barriers against the decline of a civilization, and mere racial awareness coupled with racial homogeneity are far from enough. Furthermore, if a nation is living under democracy, it has already destroyed every other barrier to its decline as it is. With the free flowing of every last idea under the sun that MUST accompany a TRUE democracy, it wouldn’t be hard for people to gradually forget racial awareness. If you would support a limited exchange of ideas, as I myself would, than you don’t really believe in democracy.
Thanks for your reply. Here’s my response:
1) Democracy is indeed in our DNA as white societies were some of the first to develop it, are arguably the ones to develop the most advanced forms of it, and are easily the most successful at practicing it.
2) The claim that white societies were at their zenith during historical eras when monarchy and aristocracy were the common form of governance is problematic. For example, the highest standards of living for the largest number of white people has inarguably been in modern, democratically-run societies. I doubt you will find many whites pining to go back to a time when simply as a result of the form of governance they lived under, most of them would be immiserated.
3) You argue that the “spritiual syphillis” that afflicts our white societies are essentially democratic principles. Well, sort of, but not exactly. I think a better, more productive way to describe the source of our problems is Modernity. Our struggle is between Tradition as the accumulated, age-old expression of our unique white racial identities vs. Modernity understood as a myriad of forces unleashed by advances in reason and the scientific method.
4) Science proves that nature is not egalitarian, very true. The races are unequal, and members within a race are unequal. This is an argument for allowing for inequality of outcomes, not necessarily for enshrining this principle in a method of governance.
We shouldn’t want to enshrine this principle in our method of governance because whites are quite capable of democracy. Democracy works best amongst peoples with a high average level of intelligence, who are capable of realizing a high degree of rational autonomy. While there are exceptions for the weakest amongst us, of course, whites are a people capable of democracy because of our average high level of intelligence and because of our capacity for self-realization as rational, autonomous individuals. This is why democracy seems to naturally flow from us.
Yes, we have our fair share of stupid folks, but here is where I differ with the Counter-Currents “mainstream” perhaps. We seem to differ over our basic perceptions of our fellow members of our race. I see whites as on average intelligent enough for democracy. Many don’t. Perhaps it takes a hard nosed realist to look at one’s race and recognize that most of the members of your extended racial family are idiots. I’m skeptical. I think that argument is likely being used as an excuse to push ideas which would ultimately only benefit a small number of people (whites exploiting other whites), or ideas which are muddled, confused, and based on romantic, anti-rational fantasy, and so on.
And frankly, if I were a member of a race of idiots and morons, from purely a self-interested point of view I wouldn’t waste my precious time being a racial chauvinist.
5) Last, the idea that we should want a form of government that limits the exchange of ideas is repellant and runs completely counter to our nature as white folks. We are intensely creative and scientific. Neither of these traits will accept suppression of ideas. Whites will naturally reject anything like that.
I’m not sure about permanent Aristocracym Matt. However well meaning it may be. I have a different but not altogether contradictory way of understanding how our people could be maintained and managed. There would still be something of a top down aspect..
I have been critical of the Constituion as set forth and the corresponding notion of American for some time. I am impressed that you have the courage to consider transcending that and take a leap on behalf of the race.
Democracy, well yes. You are right. But maybe democratic aspects could hava a place among a tested, leanred and proven group of folks – perhaps there would be a limited voice for the not so learned. Not sure of the concrete place and I don’t insist on it except that there almost certainly is need to accomodate aspects of ongoing process and openness to revisions, however slight, of our perspectives – as they are always limited.
This is not to be mistaken with PC, which is a gross exaggeration and perversion of some good things…
How would graduated citizenship work?
Citizenship would be a privledge to be earned by service and viability – no indigents or criminals get to vote. Military service would be the common path but there could be others. And also no idiots get to vote – testing on history, politics, etc.
We could have three levels of voting corresponding with the ancient division of local, state, and national. Everyone who had served, was employed, and could read could vote locally. Testing would be required for the two higher levels. An essay to show understanding would be required for the highest level.
The Founding Fathers restricted the right to vote to White, Male property owners. Good but it may have excluded some worthy people. I’m dubious about women voting at all but hopefully the stringent requirements would disqualify most leaving only the best.
All men would serve two years minimum in the reserves. There could also be some youth labor as part of this. Such experience of working with their hands and taking orders from older men from among the common people can only be to the good for any young members of an elite. It would help bring the whole nation together.
For women, motherhood would be exalted with tax breaks for having children in marriage. This would be the common path. Careers could come later. Unusual women who found this unbearable would be allowed to go their own way – service, college, early career – whatever. But it should never be allowed to become the norm as it has now.
Interesting, but that would allow for disproportionate representation by certain demographics who want war in the Middle East. I was thinking of some sort of special dispensation for those who can trace their roots to the founding stock. Perhaps gradation based on longevity within the country. I realize this sounds somewhat “un American”, sort of creating a native aristocracy, but what can I say?
There is historical precedent for this sort of system. Medieval Venice, a very successful republic, graded citizenship in such a way. They had a “golden book” containing the lineages of those of noble descent. Only these could hold certain public office, include that of Doge or duke. Next, there was a “silver book” containing the lineages of the next quality of citizens, and there were certain offices open to this group. Overall, it resulted in a harmonious system, I suspect because the golden and silver designations coincided roughly with a person’s expected degree of loyalty to the state.
Democracy is the proverbial turd in the punch bowel and replacing one turd with another will never work even if some people (especially the enemy) do have a taste for it.
“bowel”…..lol
“De-mockery” and “crockery” have between those two stools created a foul metaphor!
I think we worry too much. The race will survive but only after it has been inculcated into our brains that God meant what he said about us being separate and not to adulterate our blood lines. Kind after kind he said over and over again and from back then to Alexander the Great to now, only is the message beginning to sink in. It won’t happen in my life time but as Matt Parrott said my life is blissful The thing about happiness is that we’re wired for struggle. We only experience true bliss when immersed in a transcendent struggle with the seriousness of a child at play. It’s just like with cats. They’ll chase a string for hours, but if you simply hand them the string, they’ll bat it around for a spell, then grow bored and distracted.
I have no idea what the future holds. Trainspotter talks of the organic and natural so for all I know a return to monarchy is in the cards which will solve the problem of democracy and as a king will be of our blood will care for his people( us all having finally learned the lesson). In the meantime the superbugs are proliferating and the aquifers that water the breadbasket are drying up. Perhaps the races will all just go home and with the continuing decay of the West who could blame them or perhaps God will deal with the mixed multitude in the way he always has.
Expect the unexpected and may the C-C crowd always be around to articulate it for us.
Last week, I was heartened to hear Greg Johnson mention “National Socialism” in a positive sense during his podcast on money. This week I was pleased to read Matt Parrott’s latest which contained wise words about the need to struggle (and win) and Sandy has picked up on this in his comment above.
This is thinking in the right direction – Meaning the CORRECT direction.
Everything of value that Man has achieved on this planet (and off planet) has been achieved by the White Man and was arrived at after thousands of years of hard fought struggle – EVERYTHING Of VALUE.
The pusillanimous chorus line howls like Pavlov’s bitch every time certain ideas and trigger words are mentioned, but we, as a people are unwell and in need of medicine. All democracy can offer is a numbing of the senses before death and extinction: so now it’s time to seek remedy elsewhere. For some this will be a very bitter pill to swallow.
Democracy is the means by which THEY exploit our anxieties, our cowardice, our greed, our self-interest, etc.
If a system of democracy is retained then the new “Republic” is likely to trot off back over the rainbow to rejoin the Global Order one generation after the passing of its founding generation: perhaps sooner if autarky has not been achieved.
“Democracy is our strength” goes the death rattle.
Those words will die in the mouths of White democrats.
You said,
This is a great example of the base racism or chauvinist racism I mentioned above in a previous comment.
THEIR GOAL IS GENOCIDE. OURS. WHAT’S YOURS?
There is so much being said in this thread of such substance that I am almost speechless.
Almost.
So, I will start at the beginning.
Trainspotter in blockquote:
Already in the foundation of Harold Covington’s Northwest Republic, which has an excellent draft Constitution available for review online.
Again, this is explicitly defined in the draft Constitution of the Northwest Republic. (Note that I am writing about the Northwest Republic in the present tense.)
A two-parter. Part One shifts responsibility from the absence of a negative, to the presence of a positive, a defined duty to act on behalf of the greatest good. We saw this fail in practice n the War of the Northern Aggression because the South could not agree on the basics of organizing for effectiveness. As well, they fought to defend an institution that served a small portion of the Race, rather than the race, writ large. Part two, change the definition of the institution, and the battle is half-won. The CSA didn’t, and at that moment that battle was half lost.
This combines two concepts: the right that we already see institutionalized in the Fully Informed Jury Model, and dealing with traitors. One thing at a time, and all done, as it must be, in an “apple pie, strictly legal, sort of way.” (HT: Jim Giles)
Metic citizenship is implied in Covington’s Model. Let’s not mince words. There are citizens, and then there are Citizens. The de facto aristocratic oligarchy can get more done with a phone call than millions can do with votes in America. We already have something like this in American, by the way, with green cards giving one citizenship status in all but the right to vote. I suspect the appropriate institutional counterweight is transparency in all government operations.
This would be developed organically in the culture and the educational systems, as people would SEE, and learn, that the Race is, at a lower level, simply an Extended Family – a Tribe, if you will.
The strongest loyalty is organic, and comes from the heart. People might betray an inorganic social order, or the Ideas and Ideals implicit in such a system. Think of Kim Philby, for example. Betrayal of the Crown seems to have come easy to him. No one would betray his parents, his grandparents, his children or his grandchildren. Loyalty to the Race, defined as the Family writ large, matched by Service to the Race, beginning with Family writ small.
Lincoln did the functional equivalent of this with the Copperhead Valladingham. There IS the question of The Guardians, of course.
The plebescite process works elegantly as a check and balance on the status quo. California proves this.
Concentrations of power are inherently ineffective, save for an Elite of Controllers. This is particularly true for the financial institutions.
This means institutionalizing a System where the hearts of the Parents are focused on their Children, and the hearts of the Children are focused on their Parents. What might help this along is the belief that one and all are engaged in the fulfillment of a sacred Destiny, both personally and collectively. The word “metapolitical” comes to mind.
It is here where we enter into dangerous Constitutional grounds. In fact, Brigham Young has his invisible Guardians, the Council of Fifty, and, for “midnight justice,” he had the Danites.
My concern with this, issues of equity aside, is that this works against the fundamental principle of transparency. Yes, we all know the intelligence communities work under the principle of “By ANY Means Necessary,” but even then, a lot of this can be ameliorated by Transparency, and Astute Men, Astutely Trained.
Let’s leave such discussions for much further down the road, where the Republic has been formed, and is up and running. Of course, I know Trainspotter is not advocating the illegal or even the injudicious use of force, and that all we seek to do can, and must, be done, in an “apple pie, strictly legal, sort of way.” (HT: Jim Giles)
Not only are we the last Men standing, we are the last of this phase of the development of Western Man standing, When we go away, we take Civilization with us.
What’s In YOUR Future? Focus Northwest!
Democracy is essentially rule by those with enough money to advertise themselves to the gullible masses during election campaigns, and who only have so much money because A. they were born into wealth and privilege and therefore have very little understanding of the reality of the human condition, or B. they were given such money by powerful groups with agendas that they want carried out by those they fund. Unless it is informed by higher principles, i.e. the ones described by Trainspotter, democracy will only ever be the above, which will only ever lead to the decadent cesspool that we have today. But even then, democracy is already still a few steps in the direction of decline, even if informed by higher principles. There will always be that small group of unscrupulous connivers who know how to manipulate, even to the point of appearing like devout followers of the Cause, to secure the best possible ends for themselves at the possible expense of the nation. The masses, being susceptible to this manipulation as they always are, should have very limited input into the workings of government. Some form of representation OF the masses is necessary to determine whether their wants and needs are feasible and healthy, and most important, beneficial to the nation at large.
My comment was intended as input to the minor disagreement between Phil and Greg Paulson, btw. I didn’t mean to post it separately.
One poster did say the following about Trainspotter’s Taming the Elite article:
Interesting read, but he neglects to mention the creation of a means to ENFORCE the WILL of the people. Perhaps he just took for granted that such an entity will exist, but in a future nation composed of so many “freedom loving” libertarian types, I would assume nothing of the sort.
Does Trainspotter or anyone have anything to say about that?
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
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.