1,332 words
Greg Hood once pointed out to me that a White Nationalist Manifesto could begin with the Preamble of The Communist Manifesto, with only a few words changed:
A specter is haunting the world — the specter of White Nationalism. All the powers that rule over white nations have entered into an unholy alliance to exorcise this specter: church and state, Left and Right, oligarchs and rabble, high culture and low, academia and the lying press.
Where is the party in opposition that has not been decried as “racist” by its opponents in power? Where is the opposition that has not hurled back the branding reproach “they’re the real racists,” against the more advanced opposition parties, as well as against its reactionary adversaries?
Two things result from this fact:
1. White Nationalism is already acknowledged by all existing powers to be itself a power.
2. It is high time that White Nationalists should openly, in the face of the whole world, publish their views, their aims, their tendencies, and meet this nursery tale of the Specter of White Nationalism with a manifesto of the movement itself.
To this end, we present the following Manifesto.
The parallels are rather uncanny — and rather encouraging, since in a little more than a century, Communism went from being a specter of power to being an actual world power.
The standard game of political parties today is “negative legitimation”: They demand your allegiance based not on the positive ground of what they stand for, but simply on the fact that they are not the other party. This allows them to avoid standing for any specific platform, and if it gets them into power, they basically have a blank check, so long as they are sufficiently unlike the hated other party.
But all of the system’s parties quickly unite when any form of white ethnonationalism appears on the scene. White Nationalism is the other party for the whole globalist, multicultural, multiracial system. And as the system lurches from crisis to crisis and fails to deliver its promised multicultural paradise, increasingly its only legitimization is not being us. The system is so bent on stigmatizing people who stand against multiculturalism and globalization as evil, racist whites, that it will declare George Zimmerman a white man and Donald Trump a Nazi.
But in what sense was Communism a “power” in the 1840s, and in what sense could White Nationalism be a “power” today? In neither case are we speaking about real political power. Instead, White Nationalism today, like Communism back then, is simply an image of evil, a bogey man that the system uses to scare the rabble into compliance.
One feels that if we didn’t exist, the system would find it necessary to create us. Indeed, in many cases they do create us. First, the system projects images of its diabolical opposites. Of course, these are the diabolical opposites it prefers, diabolical opposites that it thinks it can defeat or control. And sometimes rebellious but uncritical minds will adopt these images and act accordingly — so-called “Hollywood Nazis,” for example. Second, the system will simply create its own false opposition groups.
Yet for all that, there is a real and growing resistance that is rooted not in the projections and machinations of the system but in the objective reality of racial differences, which make racially and ethnically diverse nations inferior to homogeneous ones. This resistance is growing up through the cracks in the system: the internet, social media, alternative media, and face-to-face groups. Our people are waking up. White Nationalists are now shaping their perceptions and changing their actions. We are showing them the failures of the system, explaining why it is happening, and offering them a workable and inspiring alternative.
But does this make us a power? Being in harmony with reality is certainly an advantage in a movement that is largely a debating society. It is also an advantage in contending for power with a system premised on lies. Moreover, being in harmony with reality will certainly serve as the basis of stable political power, if we can attain it.
But the problem is in the attainment. In itself, truth is not power. The difference between truth and power is the difference between theory and practice, between potentiality and actuality, and a theory we cannot yet practice, a potentiality we cannot yet actualize, is hardly better than a dream.
How then is a specter of power a real power? It is a power only in the psychological sense. It is the power to incite fear. The establishment uses the specter of White Nationalism to scare the normies. But, increasingly, the establishment itself is afraid of us as well. They think that we are behind Brexit, Trump, Wilders, Le Pen, Alternative for Germany, Orbán, etc. And in a way we are, since we support them, and our ideas also influence them or the people around them.
The establishment has turned White Nationalism into the embodiment of evil, the political equivalent of Satan. This is just the latest version of the ancient slave revolt in morals, in which slaves invert the values of their masters so they can feel good about themselves. Jan Assmann argues that the Jewish ritual law was created by the “normative inversion” of Egyptian religion, and Nietzsche argues that Christian values were created by the normative inversion of Greco-Roman pagan values. Today, every sentiment that preserves distinct peoples from a global homogeneous consumer society — a sense of rootedness and identity, patriotism and love of one’s own, a commitment to non-material values, and the willingness to fight and die for them — is labeled evil as well.
This is why evil is so appealing in the Judeo-Christian-liberal world: Everything vital, manly, aggressive, lordly, proud, rooted, patriotic, passionate, self-transcending, and glorious is bundled together and labeled evil, whereas everything weak, meek, sniveling, shilly-shallying, rootless, and self-indulgent is labeled good. All the forces that build civilizations are called evil, whereas everything that dissolves them is deemed good.
The human forebrain can convince itself of such inverted values, particularly individuals with the powerful psychological motive to overthrow the standards by which they are judged inferior. But the values of family and tribe appeal to older parts of the brain, which the forebrain can ignore and repress but never reprogram. Which means that everything we stand for already appeals to all of our people — even the most confused and decadent among us — in a deep-seated, literally visceral way.
Everything the system labels evil is a psychologically powerful force, not because evil is good, but because biologically healthy values have been defined as evil but remain irresistibly attractive nonetheless. We have power in the imaginations of our people, the power of the dark side. We must take care not to allow the enemy to define us. We have to mock their projections, not own them. But we can exploit the demonic status and emotional power they have granted us and infuse it with our own content. They define everything vital as evil. We can own the vitality and discard their value judgments.
How do we turn psychological power into political power, the specter of White Nationalism into the real thing? We have to make ourselves leaders and get our people to follow us. (The actual history of Communism has something to teach us here.) It’s a long journey, but it begins with laying the right metapolitical foundations.
An important part of the process is deconstructing the false values that clutter our people’s forebrains. We would not have gotten into this position if our conscious moral convictions had no power to determine our behavior.
Equally important, though, is crafting our appeals to the complex of pre-rational sentiments of blood, soil, and honor that our enemies stigmatize and fear. That is not the province of philosophers, but of artists and orators. It is by seizing their passions that we goad our people into action and direct them towards our goals, turning theory into practice and truth into power.
7 Comments
The quote is good. I like a quote by Heinrich Heine in which he describes the budding communist movement, I have not seen it in awhile, and the next time I do I will print it off. Anyways, I paraphrase what I do remember; “Today they sleep on straw pallets, and in cold garrets…” Every time I read it I think Heine is talking about white nationalists. Heine may have been a jew, but he had some amazing insights on human nature.
On another topic, I once stated that “FarmersOnly.com was code for a white dating site; a few weeks ago they played an ad in which a black female hooks-up with a white male. The jews must have read my quote, and put pressure on them. I have not seen a Farmersonly.com lately; they must have made a big boo-boo.
The quote appears to be from a letter of June 20, 1842, reproduced in Heine’s Lutezia. In the translation by the Jew Mitchell Abidor, it reads:
“For our part we only know that communism, though little talked about at present, and though it lives a sickly existence in hidden garrets on miserable straw, is even so the somber hero to whom an enormous, though transitory, role is reserved in the modern tragedy, and which is only waiting for its cue to come on stage. We must never lose this actor from sight, and from time to time we will send communiqués concerning the furtive rehearsals by which it is preparing its debut. Such notices will perhaps be more important than all the reports about electoral maneuvers, party quarrels, and cabinet intrigues.”
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/heine/lutece/ch44.htm
Thanks, replace “communism” with “white nationalism,” and he’s talking about us.
Ian Fleming probably had the opening lines of the Communist Manifesto in mind when he thought up the arch enemy for James Bond. SPECTRE – SPecial Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion. I’ve got a new acronym to suit the White Nationalist Manifesto.
SPECTRE – Society for the Promotion of our Environment, our Culture, our Traditions, our Race and preventing their Extermination. It even works better with the American spelling, SPECTER – Society for the Promotion of our Environment, our Culture, our Traditions and preventing the Extermination of our Race.
“Spectre” certainly sounds better than “hobgoblin.” The first English translation of the Communist Manifesto began with the words, “A frightful hobgoblin stalks through Europe.” This wasn’t exactly the most elegant of translations.
Encouraging stuff. And, yes, I wanted it to be spelled SPECTRE.
And the modeling on Marx is an interesting point, but let’s see if we can’t cut through the crusty dogma of 19th century thinking.
Our dilemma can be envisioned as the dichotomy of dynamis as opposed to energeia: power in potentia, and power in action.
I mean, is it not inevitable that a characteristic or overriding “Us vs Them” dichotomy as described here will inevitably deter WN? A co-dependency is born, by which we don the unfortunate millstone of the materialist tradition within Judaism, Christianity, Hegel, Marx, etc.
Assman and Nietzsche come at the issue from their specializations: philological, mythological and aesthetic, the areas of focus being Egypt and Classical Greece, respectively. Analytical, certainly, but not terribly materialistic.
So, whence this sudden locus-reliant leap into materiality, with “the human forebrain” and all that?
It seems like we have left our phone off the hook, after having left urgent word for Assman, Nietzsche — and by implication Schopenhauer — to call us back. They don’t need no human forebrains to lay out their cases. And, being passionate and self-transcending, neither should we.
We suffer under the hairy hand of Yahweh, his helpers, his hallucinations, his halitosis. In this regard, Schopenhauer’s concept of “Wille” overlays the Gnostic Demiurge, as envisioned by the Valentinian school. We have a blind, untrustworthy, non-personal Will in Schopenhauer, and a myopic, malign, ego-maniac God in Valentinus.
On the other hand, we have Assman’s and Nietzsche’s inversions, sort of pre-Yahweh-istic considerations, applied to the Yahweh construct. These are interpretive, made ex post facto, thus synthetic. (As are the developed prognoses of Schopenhauer and the teachings of Valentinus.)
It’s all good stuff, of course. My point is, wouldn’t we do much better to explore and enjoy the analog and the synthesis, the higher arc of such thinking?
Argumentation-wise, we need to posit a physical locus for our thought processes (a hole in our heads) as little as we need materialist opposition for its own sake.
Don’t get me wrong. This is fantastic:
Okay, Lord knows we understand what the decadence is like. But what they call evil is their problem. Let’s not make it ours.
In living out our dynamis and energeia, we first apply what we are: vital, manly, aggressive, lordly, proud, rooted, patriotic, passionate, self-transcending, and glorious. Consequently (maybe transvaluationally?), we aspire toward what we must also become: merciful, compassionate, wise.
This is how I understand the implication of Schopenhauer, anyway. It needs no materialist analog, because, just as the quality of mercy (et al) is not strained, neither can it be lent at interest.
“We suffer under the hairy hand of Yahweh, his helpers, his hallucinations, his halitosis. ”
Well done, could have gotten dubs on /pol/.