Counter-Currents
Now in Audio Version
Why Conservatives Conserve Nothing
Greg Johnson
/
RSS Feed
1,715 words / 11:38
Translations: French, German, Spanish, Swedish
Audio version: To listen in a player, click here. To download the mp3, right-click here and choose “save link as” or “save target as.” Video version: click here.
The White Nationalist critique of conservatives is simple: they conserve nothing. Therefore, we need to stop wasting our political time, energy, and money on conservatives and invest them in White Nationalism instead. And we need to do it immediately, while there is still something left to conserve.
Why do conservatives conserve nothing? Because to conserve anything, they have to win political power. Winning requires a conservative majority. Conservative voters tend to identify with their nation and its history, whereas Leftists tend to be alienated from it. In the United States and other white countries, it is natural that conservative voters are overwhelmingly white, whereas the Left tends to be a coalition of Jews, non-whites, and alienated whites (e.g., liberal ideologues, feminists, and sexual deviants).
White birthrates are below replacement levels in every country around the globe. If this trend continues, white countries will cease to exist. White populations will be replaced by growing non-white populations, whether through legal and illegal immigration or simply through the increase of non-white populations already within their borders. Even if a white country has secure borders and no non-whites, if its population declines enough, eventually burgeoning non-white populations will simply march in and make themselves at home. (While white populations decline worldwide, the population of black Africa is expected to double between now and 2050.)
As whites become minorities in our own homelands, it will be impossible for conservative politicians to win election. Therefore, it will be impossible to implement conservative policies. Therefore, the things that conservatives love will disappear. In the United States, that means limited constitutional government, fiscal responsibility, private enterprise, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, gun rights, etc. These values have tenuous enough footholds even in white countries and are almost non-existent in non-white countries.
In the short run, it might be possible for conservatives to hold onto power in certain localities and even to gain national office from time to time, due to unpredictable factors like wars, famines, scandals, and electoral whims. But in the long run, conservative policies will become politically impossible because the Left will have elected a new people with solidly Leftist preferences.
In short, conservatives will conserve nothing, because they will do nothing to preserve the white majorities needed to elect them.
At this point, conservatives will take another hit on the crack pipe of “minority outreach.” They’ll tell themselves that non-whites are “natural conservatives,” even though there is precious little constitutionally limited government, fiscal responsibility, or individual freedom south of the Rio Grande, in Africa, or anywhere else where non-whites are the majority. They’ll pander and cuck a little harder for the brown people. They’ll put forward more black and Hispanic affirmative action candidates (Cain, Carson, Cruz, Rubio). They’ll blubber and hope and pray that Jesus will miracle their asses into power for just once more election cycle. Anything, really, to avoid facing up to the slow, unrelenting countdown to white demographic Armageddon.
Of course white liberals are in the same boat. Both groups are aware that they are dying out. Neither group will lift a finger to stop the process. And when both groups contemplate the future of their values in a brown world, both of them pin everything on somehow converting their replacements, a kind of ideological transmigration from their enfeebled wraith-like bodies into the fecund, swarming colored masses. They never ask themselves why healthy races would want to adopt the values of a race that created the greatest political and economic orders in history, then consumed itself in self-indulgence, opened its borders, and gave everything away to peoples they should have held in contempt.
The only way for conservatives to conserve anything is first to conserve the white majority of natural conservatives. It can be done. White demographic decline is not a cosmic mystery. It is the predictable consequence of bad political decisions: affirmative action, feminism, desegregation, open borders, and economic globalization, for starters. It can be fixed by better decisions, starting with closing the borders; cutting illegal aliens off from employment, education, and social benefits; and then deporting the ones that do not self-deport.
Saving the white majority will be difficult. It becomes more difficult with each passing day. But it can be done, as I outline in my essay “The Slow Cleanse.” All we lack is political will. Why, then, are conservatives so opposed to doing the one thing that can save them and their values from long-term extinction? Why are they willing to gamble everything on the far more dubious and difficult path of converting a rising non-white majority to conservatism?
The answer is simple: Like a herd of elephants being stampeded off a cliff by a tiny mouse, conservatives are destroying themselves, their values, and their nations out of fear of a single word: “racism.” Under the present dispensation, it is regarded as perfectly moral for Jews, blacks, Asians, Hispanics — everyone, really, except whites — to think of themselves as ethnic groups and to fight for their group interests in the political realm. For whites, however, that would be the sin of racism. And conservatives are willing to sin quite a lot — to lie, to break oaths, to betray their constituencies and their nations — but they’d rather die than be racist. They’d rather us die too, a decision that our enemies applaud.
Whites are allowed to think of ourselves only as human beings with generic human interests that by definition cannot conflict with those of other human beings. We can benefit as a group only by benefiting all humanity. This is the basis of the desperate conservative attempt to convert blacks and browns to the virtues of constitutional government and free enterprise, as if these are a race-neutral, universal ideology rather than specifically European cultural practices, which cannot be transplanted everywhere on the globe and cannot be sustained in our own homelands once we are replaced by non-whites.
Of course, conservatives are not above making crass appeals to the ethnic interests of non-whites. It is only white ethnic interests that are taboo. As I put it in my article, “The Conscience of a Cuckservative“:
By treating appeals to white ethnic interests as simply immoral, Republicans are . . . playing by rules dictated by the Democrats. And of course the Democrats have rigged the rules in their favor.
Imagine American politics as a poker game. Each ethnic group has a place at the table and a certain number of chips, representing its collective wealth and power. Whites have the largest stack. But every group gets to play a wild card, “the race card,” except for whites. No matter how big our initial advantage might be, if we play by those rules, we will lose hand after hand, until we have surrendered our wealth, our power, our country, and any control we might have over our destiny — or we kick over the table and refuse to play a game rigged against us.
I used to think conservatives were unprincipled. But they are highly principled. The problem is that their principles are provided by their enemies, and if we act upon them, we will be destroyed.
In America, however, the conservatives are getting worried. They were stung by the cuckservative barb; they are nervous about the rise of the Alt Right; and they are terrified of Donald Trump, who merely stands for a moderate, non-racial form of nationalism. But like their cousins the Social Justice Warriors, when their bullshit is called, conservatives just double down.
A case in point is David French’s National Review article, “The Race-Obsessed Left has Released a Monster it Can’t Control,” which correctly argues that Left-wing, anti-white identity politics is giving rise to Right-wing, white identity politics (the “monster” in French’s title).
French, however, is primarily concerned with keeping his hands clean of the taint of “racism.” So he recommends that we ignore the fact that we are being attacked as whites and focus instead on “universal human dignity, with each of us created in the image of God.” The trouble with such high-minded religious universalism is that it does not stop the onslaught of anti-white identity politics. It only numbs whites to the organized ethnic interest groups gnawing at our entrails.
Theodoor Rombouts, Prometheus
As F. Roger Devlin argues so brilliantly in his essay “Why I Write“:
Those traditional conservatives who continue to admonish us against the dangers of “biological determinism” are increasingly condemning themselves to irrelevance. The plea that “race isn’t everything” is valid per se, but not especially germane to the situation in which we find ourselves. For we are not the aggressors in the battle now being fought. And in any battle, it is the aggressors’ prerogative to choose the point of attack: if they come at you by land, you do not have the option of fighting them at sea.
Race is everything to our enemies, and it is the angle from which they have chosen to attack our entire civilization. It is also where they have achieved their greatest victories: you can see this from the way “conservative” groups feel they must parrot the language of the egalitarians just to get a hearing. Such well-meaning but naïve friends of our civilization are in effect consenting to occupy the status of a “kept” opposition.
The more we try to avoid confronting race directly, the more our enemies will press their advantage at precisely this point. Tactically, they are correct to do so. And they will continue until we abandon our defensive posture and turn to attack them on their own chosen ground.
The great political battle of our time is over race and identity. Our enemies know it, but our friends don’t. Conservatives conserve nothing because they won’t fight. Whites are being attacked as a race. The conservative response, however, is to mumble something about universal human dignity and change the topic to ethanol subsidies. Whites can only defend ourselves as a race. We can only secure conservative values by conserving our race. We must embrace the politics of white racial identity. The only true conservatism is White Nationalism.
16 comments
Devlin may be right that white people have not chosen the ‘point of attack’, but European civilization is far from non-aggressive. There are many rather westernized Jews in Israel who want looser restrictions in Israel and who, mirabile dictu, are accused by the Israeli Right of being ‘Frankfurt School traitors’.
It is perfectly understandable that a competent enemy would hit us where we are most vulnerable, our syncretism, our universalism and ‘open mindedness’ – just as feminists hit Northern European men right on their silly chivalry and (often benevolent) paternalism. Whether by instinct or by design, we must admit that they quite squarely hit the huge target that we presented to them. Let us never respond like those pathetic, mostly white men who now claim to be victimized by women! I mean, what if we *did* start the fight?
One could argue that the West, and not the least America, is as guilty of insane hubris as of childish naivete. Case in point: we seem to believe now that our societies will reproduce asexually.
Enough quibbling. I enjoyed the essay.
That White conservatives are degraded and beholden to liberal value judgment has become increasingly obvious with the rise of Trump. But sadder still is the spectacle of the White liberal, who merely keeps their seat warm for a non-white politician to replace them when available, e.g. Clinton in 2008. Their coalition demands it.
This interesting essay is quite charitable towards conservatives.
A more uncharitable view would be that they are simply one of the two pincers of the globalist assault on Aryan society (the other pincer being the liberals/Left) – and as such, have functioned as they were intended to – i.e. to divert and distract the white population’s response into futile channels.
Of course, this is merely an application of something Julius Evola mentioned in ‘Men Among The Ruins’:
‘Often the tactic of replacement develops efficaciously in the form of a tactic of counterfeits. It may happen that after the effects of the destructive work reach the material plane, they may become so visible as to provoke a reaction, and thus ideas and symbols are employed for a defence and a reconstruction… Then the occult war is not waged in a direct manner; often attention is paid to promoting only distortions and counterfeits of these ideas. In this way, the reaction is contained, deviated, or even led in the opposite direction.’ (Men Among The Ruins, pages 244-245; italics Evola’s).
Have the conservatives ‘contained, deviated, or even led in the opposite direction’ the energies of their white rank-and-file supporters?
If I’m fighting to conserve anything, it is my race, our cultural achievements, and our living space. The principles of “constitutional government” and “free enterprise” should be subordinate to this.
When I was reading this article I was reminded of this: http://www.anthonymludovici.com/invasion.htm
I think that a lot of conservative White people are embarrassed to talk about being White and having interests as a race because the scientific evidence about racial differences is not widely known. Race Realists know about the biological differences, but these facts are kept under wraps by the MSM. People know race isn’t everything, but they don’t realize that it is primary. Many conservative oriented Whites think discussing race is for ignorant provincial nativists/rednecks. (Meanwhile, they are the ones who are in the dark.)
When I use a line James Edwards has used in a discussion and say: You can’t have a first world country with a third world (non-White) population, people nod, but can’t articulate why this is true.
Also, I wonder if some Whites are uncomfortable with the idea of defending White interests because it means that we are becoming one minority among many and they don’t have the guts to engage in any sort of important struggle.
…….driven off a cliff like a herd of elephants by a tiny mouse. That’s a very picturesque way of putting it and all the more shameful that it is allowed to happen.
The poker analogy is the best illustration I’ve ever come across to clarify the political game being played in D.C. It boggles the mind, how so many European-Americans, cannot see the joker in the game held by other cultures/races. I mean it, it’s mindboggling!!
The globalist elites have a “home game” and an “away game.” The home game (in the West) is political correctness, White genocide, and degeneracy of all sorts. The away game (in the non-West) is war, neo-liberal privatization, and coup d’etats. The main job of the left in America is to carry out the home game while the right pretends to oppose them. The main job of the right is to carry out the away game while the left pretends to oppose them.
If the left wants to talk about “social justice,” I think we should respond with “inter-generational justice” (which the left has already summoned with the spectre of “global warming”). All the Boomer cucks who sold the Millennials (their children) down the diversity river should be held accountable for the crimes they’ve committed against us. I’m a huge proponent of closing the feedback loops, and if we ever get an America 2.0, there should be a trial every 20-30 years to hold the leaders of each preceding generation accountable for their virtues or sins.
The generation of ’68 were so resentful and misguided that during the student riots, their heroes from the Frankfurt School tended to side with the police. I believe in establishing genuine responsibility between generations (and this includes care of the elderly by the young). In real terms, this happens most in the family and at school/university, not in ‘duty of care’ lawsuits.
Besides, only the most revolutionary governments are willing to prosecute their immediate predecessors, because the process raises the question of their own legitimacy.
Here’s what I would like to see Counter Currents do: take some prominent members of Conservatism, Inc., sit them down in the “comfy chairs,” get out the metaphorical bright lights…and ask them some real questions:
* Why are you not fighting against race replacement when white people are your majority constituency?
* How do you expect to win elections in the future without a white majority?
* Where has conservative minority outreach ever gained any any useful voters–ever?
* And why do you suppose that the “cuckservative” meme has taken off?
Consider for a moment how if the conservatives were to abolish affirmative action and defund the assorted ethnic “studies” programs on American campuses, while mobilizing the white voter base, they could easily undercut much of the infrastructure of their supposed liberal opposition.
Of course, it can be argued that Conservatism, Inc was a fraud from the get-go, that the American two-party system is a shadow-show to keep The Matrix pulled over the eyes of the citizenry.
…white liberals are in the same boat.
As we proceed into the 21st century, we see the political goals of liberalism increasingly shattered. There are fewer practical civil liberties. Democracy is being replaced by bureaucratic decree. The American working class is being replaced with third worlders. Every major and minor American city which has been turned over to black control has turned into a cesspool of corruption, crime and economic self-destruction. Non-white mass migration into Europe is leading to assorted illiberal havoc from Rotherham to Cologne.
But the difference between liberals and conservatives is that the liberals gain a couple of things from non-white replacement. Like votes. And like muscle in the streets ala the Black Lives Matter quasi-necklacing street parties. Though perhaps all this is starting to backfire. BLM seems to have gotten out of control with one too many towns torched, while Bernie Sanders comes out of nowhere to upset the party hacks like H. Clinton.
And for both conservatives and liberals we might ask much longer can they pick up stakes to put their children into “better schools?”
Anyway, it would be useful to dust off the comfy chairs and ask these people some real questions. And perhaps have in reserve some Red Pills.
The following is my opinion and is by no means a call to violence or insurrection:There is no shortage of “trigger pullers,” i.e. White people with weapon training and an understanding of military tactics. What we don’t have right now are disciplined political soldiers schooled and learned in the art of Revolutionary politics. The templates for Revolutionary change are out there and recorded in our history. All we have to do is study them, learn from them, and put them into action.
The only circumstances under which gun collectors will actually use their weapons is to protect their guns. Which makes them pretty much useless for preserving everything else of important. The left could get rid of 9 out of 10 amendments to the Constitution without fearing and armed uprising from Second Amendment types.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall 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.
Paywall Access