What is American Nationalism?Greg Johnson
French version here
White Nationalism is not nationalism for undifferentiated, generic white people. Such beings do not exist. Every white person has a specific ethnic identity: a mother language and a culture. White Nationalism is ethnic nationalism for all white peoples.
Even in European colonial societies, where different European stocks have blended together, we do not have generic white people. If that were true, there would be no differences between Americans and Canadians. But there are differences, and these differences are ethnic, even though both countries have similar origins, similar histories, similar institutions, and developed on the same continent, right next door to one another. Americans, Canadians, Australians, Quebecois, New Zealanders, etc. are all distinct white ethnic groups.
If Americans are a white ethnicity, then White Nationalists in America should be American nationalists, just as White Nationalists in Hungary are Hungarian nationalists, White Nationalists in Poland are Polish Nationalists, White Nationalists in Quebec are Quebecois nationalists, and so forth.
What is the message of White Nationalists who take up the banner of true American nationalism? Basically, it is the same message as White Nationalists everywhere: Race is real, ethnicity is real, and racial and ethnic diversity within the same country is not a strength but a weakness: a source of alienation, friction, inefficiency, cultural debasement, long-simmering resentments, and even hatred and violence. Therefore, the best way to ensure peace between different ethnic groups, as well as to afford them maximum latitude for independent development, is to create sovereign homelands for all peoples who desire to control their own destinies. Since Americans are a distinct white ethnicity, American nationalism means turning America into a homogeneously white homeland.
The inevitable objection to American Nationalism is that America is not a white society with a common culture but a multiracial, multicultural society unified not by common blood, or by a common culture, but by a commitment to a civic creed — a central principle of which is the proposition that “All men are created equal” — as well as the “American dream” of ever-rising material standards of living. This is the “civic” as opposed to “racial/ethnic” version of American nationalism.
Interestingly enough, this objection does not come from the far Left, which maintains that even today America is a “normatively white” and “white supremacist” society, regardless of the presence of other races on our soil. Instead, the civic interpretation of American nationalism is asserted primarily by people on the center-Left and the center-Right. But recently they have been joined by White Nationalists and Southern Nationalists, who argue that White Nationalists cannot be American nationalists, because American nationalism is somehow intrinsically and essentially civic nationalist.
There is no question that most Americans today believe in the civic nationalist conception of American identity. But they’ve simply been fooled. As I have argued in my essay, “Is White Nationalism Un-American?,” American civic nationalism is a fundamentally false interpretation of American history and identity that has been imposed upon the American mind by comprehensive propaganda in education and the mass media.
America was not founded as a society “dedicated to the proposition” that “all men are created equal.” The phrase “all men are created equal” is found in the Declaration of Independence, which is not a legal document of the United States. The phrase is simply a denial of hereditary kingship and aristocracy, not a blanket claim that all men — and especially all races — are equal.
The Preamble to the US Constitution specifies its aims:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Note that there is nothing about promoting the “proposition” that all men are created equal, or any propositions at all for that matter. Instead, the purpose of the US government is to promote concrete social goods: justice, domestic and international security, the common good, and liberty.
Moreover, the Constitution only promotes its aims for the founders and their posterity, not all of mankind. And it went without saying that the founders and their posterity were white people.
The claim that the United States was founded in 1776 to promote universal human equality comes from Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, another piece of high-minded rhetorical flummery which is not a legal document of the United States either.
Although the Constitution does not spell out the race of the founders and their “posterity,” the Naturalization Act of 1790 — which deals with people who were not born American, i.e., people who were not the posterity of the founders — made very clear that the only people who could join the American polity as citizens were free white people of good character (i.e., excluding convicts and indentured servants).
The United States did not allow blacks to become citizens until 1868. Blacks from other parts of the Americas could become citizens only after 1870. American Indians who did not live on reservations could become citizens in 1868. Citizenship was granted to all American Indians only by the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. Chinese immigration began in the 1840s but was banned from 1882 to 1943, and Chinese born in America were not considered citizens until 1898. Only in 1940 was naturalization opened to people of Chinese, Philippine, and East Indian descent, as well as Indians and mestizos from other parts of the Americas. But each extension of citizenship to non-whites was fiercely resisted. Moreover, until 1965, American immigration laws were designed to maintain a white supermajority with an ethnic balance based on the 1890 census.
But even after America’s white supremacist immigration laws were scrapped in 1965, America still remained a culturally and normatively white society. For people around the world, an American simply means a white person. Hence the necessity of phrases like African-America and Asian-American. This is why I have always opposed white Americans calling themselves “European-Americans,” because the phrase is as redundant as “feline lion” or “canine mastiff.” Beyond that, calling ourselves European-Americans implicitly abandons the normative whiteness of American identity and puts us on the same level as non-whites, who are Americans only in a legal sense of the word.
When America’s white founders created the Constitution to bequeath good government to their white posterity — and when they specified that the only foreigners who could become American citizens were free white people of good character — they were declaring that a free and orderly white society is every American’s birthright.
But this birthright was stolen from us. Three principal forces were responsible for the undoing of white America:
- The cheap labor/plantation model of capitalism, which imported black slaves, Chinese coolies, and mestizo stoop labor to undercut the wages of free white workers
- Christian and liberal universalism and egalitarianism, which regard natural partialities to family and nation as illegitimate
- Jewish ethnic lobbying to create a conception of America that was maximally open to Jewish immigration and upward mobility
The goal of American White Nationalism is to restore the free white nation that is our birthright.
American White Nationalism is far more likely to win the battle for a white homeland than anti-American forms of White Nationalism. The white Americans who lean toward white identity politics, even implicitly, overwhelmingly vote for the Republican Party. They also tend to be conservative and patriotic. They identify with America and feel a strong attachment to American symbols.
Like everyone else in our society, they have been miseducated about America’s nature and history and think it was founded as a color-blind propositional nation.
But they are also increasingly aware of the catastrophic consequences of diversity. Thus as white demographic displacement accelerates, these Americans will become increasingly receptive to our account of America’s real identity, how our country has been hijacked by hostile aliens, and how we can Make America White Again.
By contrast, anti-American White Nationalists will have to convince our people of all the same facts about race, diversity, and demographic displacement. But, as if that were not already enough of an uphill battle, they will also have to sell Americans a raft of anti-American ideas: cranky conspiracy theories about Freemasons, Southern Nationalism, and the like. The anti-Americans will also have to convince Americans of a whole host of historical revisionist theses about the Civil War, the Third Reich, and the Holocaust, none of them really necessary for white survival in America. Finally, the anti-Americans will have to explain away their use of symbols which are at best alien to Americans and at worst are freighted with highly negative connotations.
Both forms of White Nationalism communicate the same truths. But American nationalists relate them to ideas that feel authentic to our target audience, while anti-American nationalists link them to ideas that at best strike most Americans as alien and inauthentic and at worse seem downright repugnant.
Which approach is likely to make more converts? Which approach is more likely to save the white race in America, which is really the only thing that matters? Clearly, anti-American White Nationalism is self-marginalizing and self-defeating. American nationalism is the only way forward.
True American nationalism is a form of White Nationalism, and true White Nationalism in America is American nationalism.
The Honorable Cause: A Review
Remembering Oswald Spengler (May 29, 1880-May 8, 1936)
Remembering Louis-Ferdinand Céline (May 27, 1894–July 1, 1961)
Nueva Derecha vs. Vieja Derecha Capítulo 1: Política y Metapolítica
Remembering Richard Wagner (May 22, 1813-February 13, 1883)
Remembering Dominique Venner (April 16, 1935–May 21, 2013)
Remembering Julius Evola (May 19, 1898–June 11, 1974)
Do It for Western Civilization!
Notice: Trying to get property 'ID' of non-object in /home/clients/030cab2428d341678e5f8c829463785d/sites/counter-currents.com/wp-content/themes/CC/php/helpers/custom_functions_all.php on line 150
In case I manage to go to the Scandza Forum, I have written down some questions. One if them being: Do you see a possibility that white nationalism in the USA developes into American nationalism? After all, white americans are the real americans. The answer came already!
I am a swede. Once I went on a Ferry between Sweden and Germany. It was no holiday trip. The Ferry was only there because the distance is to wide for a bridge. there was only Poles travelling on that Ferry, families working in Sweden and going back to Poland for the weekend, or maybe there was some holiday. I felt very foreign, even though there was nothing But white people omboard. For me, white is not enough. I am a swedish nationalist.
Race does have significance, obviously. I recognized growing up that there was non-white induviduals who were and are culturally swedish, and it did not bother me, because they behaved just like anybody. But I Also saw that, between the lines, those persons had some identification problems, and in not a few cases They developed an anti white sentiment. Most Swedes didnt care about race, But the odd asian or black, even if being culturally very swedish, felt the difference. It is a problem. White people feel this alienation more and more this days, because of heavy nonwhite immigration, unvoluntarily paid for by the swedish Taxpayers. People feel race.
I Also agree that talks about the holoucaust is not consructive. The movement would Also benefit By quitting any third reich nostalgia. It doesnt matter much more if Hitler was right or not, as if Napoleon was right or wrong. And even if it matters, it does not matter more then the present world and the future.
Dismantle duble standards, bashing white guilt and building white pride should be priority.
Anyhow, Take care.
If you couldn’t feel at ease around Polish families on holiday, you have a much deeper problem, comrade.
It wasnt that I felt unsafe or disliked the poles. It most likely would have been worse if it had been africans or ghetto-arabs from a Stockholm suburb. I had been living a while in Germany, and remembered the feeling of losing My country while on that boat. I did not feel “these poles are like me”, I felt “Sweden is diminishing”. The poles by the way think We are idiots when We happily destroy our country.
Random notes. I am not a citizen of the U.S.A., but definable as W.N., so a sympathiser.
Am replying to Namnlos because he made such a strange comment.
I read that Sweden of now is such a hell-hole in many places, it is very strange that you find Poles so disturbing. Have met Americans of Swedish descent a few times, they are good people in my experience. Have only met two Swedes from that fiasco, women, both overbearingly supercilious, not obviously homosexual, so probably not, but with gigantically swollen egos on account of being Swedish women with PC ideas.
That was over twenty years ago, so I have little doubt that both have at least a small role in destroying your homeland.
I have never had bad social connections with Polish people, drunken and stupid at times, but kind at heart.
As for the wars of religion in this scene, all counter-productive, there are even a couple of Catholic bishops and archbishops in the U.S.A. who are quite good. Admittedly, the majority run and encourage hideous population replacement programmes.
However, the few remnants of old-time European paganism died with the industrial revolution, the real parts died earlier, depending on place. All too many defining themselves as new right and nationalist, in my experience, define themselves as Crowleyite (or, as Crowley would say in his nonce.word, ‘Thelemite’), or just Satanists.
I agred with Mr. Johnson, but have read Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, much more, keep the NT and the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius by my bed.
It’s great to see a consensus starting to form around key concepts from different parts of our movement. To see Andrew Anglin and Greg Johnson on the same page like this is especially encouraging.
I myself went through that phase where I was into Yockey and other pessimistic thinkers and just wanted to see America fall so a new order could rise. I was VERY blackpilled about the future. But then a lot of things happened. The Trump campaign made it okay to talk about beaner immigrants in a negative light and how we need protectionism, which no republican has said aloud going back to I don’t know when. A fresh, new, younger White nationalist movement arose in the form of the Alt-Right, which has surpassed the older WN movement in terms of mass appeal by a longshot. Of course, we still find inspiration and direction from plenty of the over-35 crowd! The happenings going on in Europe also made me realize, sadly, just how much better we Whites have it here in America.
Now I feel that we don’t need to wait for an apocalypse or hide in caves. WE are bringing about a new order by changing the culture through our articles, essays, pranks, memes, videos, songs, and the attention we get from the mainstream media. We are American White Nationalists.
Excellent. This is the sort of clear, positive, and unifying vision I hope to read someday soon in the WN Manifesto. Greg, do you have an update for us?
Here is a philosophical proposition I found edifying: anytime you see state or institutional power illegalizing scientific or historical inquiry, one can immediately infer from that
A) what the real truth is
B) who wields actual power in that society
Galileo and the heliocentric theory for example.
I like this because it says nothing that could be offensive or actionable, yet it says everything!
White nationalists should not embrace “petty nationalism”: they can preserve their own language or local dialect, their culture, their ethnicity without necessity of (more) internal (sub)divisions. Look at Spain, look at Russia, look at China… look at The Roman Empire.
Instead of that, we need a great reformulation of European Union project, now as continental block, not merely for economic purposes.
“To see Andrew Anglin and Greg Johnson on the same page like this is especially encouraging.” Hear, hear! I never would have understood what Anglin was trying to do if I hadn’t been intellectually initiated by Counter Currents.
CC, the Stormer, and the podcast Fash the Nation on TRS are for me the holy trinity of WN media.
Good article, especially the last part about how to portray White identity without alienating any/some Whites. I have learned not to use the Nordic and Aryan labels, at least not too often, and with some earnest and firm/polite explanation which up till now has seemed to gone over fairly well. Many Whites seem turned off if the definition of White revolves around or is heavily dependent on being Nordic/Aryan.
Caucasian seems to encompass semitic peoples of the Middle East, so I no longer try to use that one.
I like to tell people that America did not exist until a European ie White imagined/conceived/invented it. Not Anglo-Saxon, not Nordic or Aryan. But rather European. I think this makes Whites of European heritage think they are just as welcome in America as any White with ancestors here in the Revolutionary War period (like myself). So what if the US gov’t gave a piece of paper to some non Euro heritage person and called them a US citizen? That doesn’t make them an American. ONLY Whites can be Americans; they just fit in naturally and assimilate (I know, over used).
I don’t think we need the antics of the neo-Nazis in America such as used by George Lincoln Rockwell back in the 1960s. Those don’t suit us here in America.
One thing I’ve noticed here in America is that the political LEFT is portrayed as many different groups; BLM, feminists, jews, negroes, antifa etc. Whereas the political Right (mostly Whites) is lumped all into one category. When the political LEFT dominated news/entertainment media encounter someone who dissents from LEFTIST orthodoxy (no matter the orthodoxy dissent to) then the dissenter will be labeled nazi/rasict/etc. Every contention becomes trying to slough off the pejorative label and never really gets to the heart of the contention. I call it being zipped up in the slander bag.
When a LEFTIST group does something the Right objects to, it is described as “oh, that’s just anifa” or “oh, that’s just negroes”, and etc. I think this allows the LEFT to avoid being called anti-White, which is what all these subcategories of the LEFT really are; they are against Whites and White males especially.
I think Whites need to constantly harp on the reality that all LEFTIST groups are about hatred of Whites. Everything a LEFTIST group does/says boils down to hatred of Whites and what Whites created on this continent: America. Non Whites know instinctively they will never be an “American”, so they are always trying to deconstruct it.
For me personally, the Alt Right movement has, at its core, always been about American White Nationalism, and that is why I joined the cause. To truly understand what American White Nationalism is though, one needs to look at the most important cultural and ideological difference between North America/the Anglosphere and most of continental Europe, namely that the former is majority/historically Protestant and the latter is majority/historically Catholic.
Protestantism is highly decentralized and individualistic, whereas Catholicism is highly centralized and collectivist.
I personally feel Thomas Nast best embodies what I understand to be true American White Nationalism:
“A recurring theme in Nast’s cartoons is racism and anti-Catholicism. Nast was baptized a Catholic at the Sankt Maria Catholic Church in Landau, and for a time received Catholic education in New York City. When Nast converted to Protestantism remains unclear, but his conversion was likely formalized upon his marriage in 1861. (The family were practicing Episcopalians at St. Peter’s in Morristown). Nast considered the Catholic Church to be a threat to American values.” – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Nast#Style_and_themes
Great website dedicated to the works of Thomas Nast: https://thomasnastcartoons.com/
The Alt Right movement has been so successful and appealing to most white Americans, because it has been implicitly Protestant. I wrote a lengthy, but I think valuable and insightful comment on this topic here (excerpts):
“Mr. Hart, in my opinion, correctly observed the Protestant nature of the Alt Right in his April 2016 article titled: Neocons Want To Destroy Alt Right, Bring Back Buckley-Style Excommunications. Too Bad. http://www.vdare.com/articles/neocons-want-to-destroy-alt-right-bring-back-buckley-style-excommunications-too-bad
Nativist movements in the United States have historically also been both counter-Semitic and counter-Catholic/Papal
Even though Jared Taylor disagreed with him, in my opinion, Robert P. Jones CEO, Public Religion Research Institute; author, “The End of White Christian America”, is actually quite correct with his observation on the broad appeal of Donald Trump and, by extension, the Alt Right to American Protestants:
JONES That’s really critical. So when they talk about white civilization, it really is this WASPy, white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant piece of it that’s critically important.
And ‘Protestants’, generally, created racialist states where-ever they went: The USA, South-Africa, Australia. The Roman Catholic Church, as a self-consciously universalist entity, seems a more likely entity to blame. Sure enough, the rise of proto-Multicultacracy in the USA clearly correlates with the waves of Jews and Roman-Catholics through Ellis-Island.” – https://www.unz.com/article/what-can-msmclinton-say-about-alt-right-that-theyve-not-already-said-about-trumpgop/#comment-1561897
The following “Salon” article is actually quite perceptive in assessing and surprisingly honest and open in acknowledging the achievements of the Alt Right movement, but what they fail to understand is why the Alt Right movement has been “disturbingly successful”. The secret ingredient is explicit White nationalism and implicit Protestantism, in my opinion:
“All this strife may not matter much, however, because the alt-right has been disturbingly successful at injecting its message into the mainstream of conservative America, by way of Fox News and the Republican Party.” – https://www.salon.com/2018/03/19/alt-right-is-dying-but-powerful-conservatives-are-mainstreaming-its-ideas/
The Alt Right movement truly changed/realigned the world…
P.s.: Great contribution by Mr. Duchesne on the topic https://counter-currents.com/2017/08/should-the-protestant-ethic-become-the-spirit-of-the-alt-right/
Protestantism is simply Christianity slowly abolishing itself. I am fine with that.
Very interesting way of putting it.
Personally, I would describe myself as a theistic rationalist:
“Theistic rationalism is a hybrid of natural religion, Christianity, and rationalism, in which rationalism is the predominant element. According to Henry Clarence Thiessen, the concept of theistic rationalism first developed during the eighteenth century as a form of English and German Deism. The term “theistic rationalism” occurs as early as 1856, in the English translation of a German work on recent religious history. Some scholars have argued that the term properly describes the beliefs of some of the prominent Founding Fathers of the United States, including George Washington, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, James Wilson, and Thomas Jefferson.” – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_rationalism
“The Religious Beliefs of America’s Founders: Reason, Revelation, and Revolution (American Political Thought)” – https://www.amazon.com/Religious-Beliefs-Americas-Founders-Revelation/dp/0700620214
Brenda Walker put it really well and accurately, in my opinion; “Religious kings are a double bad.”:
“The Catholic Church is a big government operation itself and simpatico with other systems of control—all in the name of virtuous behavior, of course.
But the United States of America was founded on a different principle—that of human freedom based on limited, representative government. Quite simply, America is a result of the Reformation. Many in the founding generations of Protestants came for religious freedom and to escape oppression acting in the name of faith. Traditional Americans don’t like kings, and founders fought a revolution to be rid of them. Religious kings are a double bad.
Much of the historical American sentiment smeared as “anti-Catholic” is actually a rejection of all kings and oppressive rule in Europe, where the Vatican acted as a government.” – https://www.vdare.com/articles/uninspired-american-patriot-says-vamoose-dopey-pope
Thank you very much for the feedback, Mr. Johnson.
Great article, Greg.
Perhaps we could someday make Columbia from Bioshock Infinite a reality. An American nationalist floating cloud city of gilded age futurism.
I have doubts about revivifying “American” identity. First, granting that the USA was not founded on the proposition that all men are created equal; granting, too, that the founders had the unstated assumption that the country was for White Europeans and their posterity only; and granting that this understanding persisted more or less in tact down until 1965; granting all of this: Does it not remain the case that the American Founding was fundamentally a Modern, Enlightenment project? To the extent that the Enlightenment (revolt by print media against Crown, Church, traditional culture & authority) is at the root of so much that ails the West, does this not suggest that there is nothing that can be salvaged of American identity?
By contrast, if we were to emphasize our European legacy, to see ourselves as the progeny of Europe, then we could still step back behind the year 1700, or the year 1600, choose your starting point for the inauguration of the great decline.
I realize that I am being rather “linear” in my thinking, but surely there is a great problem in the fact that America is coeval with the Enlightenment project.
I suppose one way to salvage American identity would be to emphasize the experience of the frontier, of the rugged men who charted new territories, cleared land, plowed the first fields, built the first towns. These men were probably for the most part untainted by Enlightenment ideas, and probably cut-off from the print media of the Eastern seaboard. They were the ArcheoFuturists of their time.
But when I consider the “American” component of my own ancestry, it is that of Quakers who did not venture in the least from their original area of settlement. And, sad to say, I see little that is of merit in the Quaker past. However, like most Americans, I also have more recent European ancestry, and I today think of myself as European-American.
And this is my mantra, “White Race, Western Culture, Our Only Future is European”
I don’t agree. I don’t have any patience for broad-brush critiques of modernity and the Enlightenment. Every sensible criticism of the Enlightenment was offered by one Enlightenment thinker or another. But it is definitely true that the worst elements of the Enlightenment won out over the best in America.
I am not sure where you draw the line between Enlightenment and Counter-Enlightenment thinkers, or between Moderns, Anti-Moderns, and Post-Moderns. Certainly all sensible critics do not simply belong to the first camp!
Let’s posit something like “Albion’ s Seed,” whereby the American regime has four regional folkways as its basis; overlaid by a formal Constitution largely informed by Locke & Montesquieu, but also by Aristotle & Cicero, and by the broader English common law; and then continually re-informed by the latest iterations of modern thought’s “dissatisfaction” with itself, by psychoanalysis, by existentialism, and so forth. This unstable composite is “America,” and the question is how to appeal to “Americans.”
Let’s then say that the Enlightenment project essentially aimed to replace one class of elites with a new class of elites. Kings, aristocrats, bishops, and traditional military men go down, with the Great War entailing the final discredit of the old guard, replaced at the top by journalists, lawyers, bankers, university professors. And yet today, a mere hundred years after the end of the Great War, we see that the this new ruling class is utterly treasonous and without legitimacy.
Our task, therefore, is to overthrow the political order brought about by the Enlightenment, even if we have no great quarrel with its other aspects, in particular no opposition to modern science.
Now I have just read over your article from 2012, “Notes on Populism, Elitism, and Democracy,” and I agree with it completely!!! There, you sketch-out a mixed regime in the very best sense. However, certain of your proposals do not seem palatable to the American temper. In particular, you call for a circle of aristocrats selected from a rigorous educational institution modeled on the Catholic Church, and at the very helm a monarch (who I expect would either be a hereditary monarch or selected by the “college of cardinals”). The SS academies were also modeled on the Catholic Church, which is fine by me, but not especially American. This is what I would call stepping behind the year 1600, back to our European roots.
Perhaps I misunderstand your intention in calling for an American Nationalism, but I imagine you are responding to European New Right criticisms of the country’s Puritan founding (“Calvin the Judaizer”); its cultural sterility, its spurning of quasi-pagan folk customs, its rejection of the Baroque; its lack of a self-sacrificing feudal elite; its soldiers who fight for shallow creeds rather than “patrie”; its pursuit of material prosperity above all else; its lack of scale and harmony, its subdivisions and strip malls; and its ridiculous & brutal messianism (“Hebraic confidence in their mission”).
I must confess I find these criticisms of America to be true. Therefore, again, we must step back behind America, back behind 1700, back behind 1600, to find our models. We must recognize that we have been the foolish, prodigal sons of Europe. We must take our bearings anew from our deep roots in Europe.
I apologize for my lengthy, meandering, disconnected comments. And, yes, I acknowledge I nowhere address the question of how to appeal to “Americans.”
Why stop at the Enlightenment overthrowing the Church and Crown? The pagans will tell us it was the Church itself that was a foreign imposition that is the root of so much that ails the west.
How is any of this different than the people who want to “go back” to the NSDAP time period? Why is everyone interested in playing historical reenactments isn’t just satisfied with whatever our actual history is?
No one is suggesting we start wearing powdered wigs, or advocate for enslaving Africans again, or “going back” to before the steam engine. We’re Americans. We have a history and a legacy that is, at its core, White nationalist. Let’s just work from that.
If the Church, the European aristocracy, or even the classical world were held us to the standards that the American Founders are, we could easily make the same arguments that the Church, the European aristocracy, and even the Greeks and Romans were the “beginning of the decline.”
All of these disingenuous, nit-picking arguments are simply used as a reason why White Americans aren’t allowed to advocate in our own interests.
This counter-Enlightenment fetish isn’t the slightest bit convincing and it certainly isn’t interesting to many White Americans. Instead of “going back” to before the Enlightenment, how about “going forward” to something post-Enlightenment? The “reactionaries” have already accepted Whig history, they just reverse it. Whigs say everything is getting better, reactionaries say everything is getting worse.
They are both wrong.
The U.S. Constitution does have a 14th amendment which guarantees equal protection under the law for Jews, blacks, Muslims and any other person of color who was either born here or naturalized into citizenship. Presumably, that makes an “American Nationalist” someone who basically wants to overturn the civil war and restore Jim Crow and white supremacy, except this time all over the country instead of in the South only. Because what else could a non-civic American Nationalist be? A nationalist who appeals to the Constitution and to historic Americanism while also accepting the 14th amendment’s codification of legal equality is exactly what a civic nationalist is.
Obviously we reject the 14th Amendment and ruling over blacks and other non-whites. You are simply being dishonest here.
Greg again writes a definitive article on another WN topic. Keep up the great work, these articles will be read long after we’re gone and the next generation is fighting for our people.
Let’s try to resume the last part without using the somewhat artificial concept of “Anti-American American Nationalists” :
The (((usual suspects))) dont allow us to question history, let alone to refer to past White Nationalist Movements and our brainwashed fellow Whites have swallowed it all hook-line-and-sinker. Therefore, although Holocaust, NS, WWII, etc. are the cornerstones of our ennemies’ power and are constantly used against us, we should never eat fruits from these forbidden trees and call it all “cranky conspiracy theories about Jews” – hoping this will fool our hostile elite and bring the wide scale acceptance we long for.
I expected this from you.
Every time sensible people point out the obvious truth that the whole panoply of Nazi fixations is self-defeating in the attempt to persuade our people of White Nationalism, the paranoid mind twists this into the accusation that we are simply appealing, vainly, to our enemies for their approval.
The mentality you represent is worse than useless. It is an objective hindrance to saving our race.
Greg, allow me to me state three points:
1)I never argued for running around with swastikas, I understand that we have to avoid certain gestures although it’s difficult to think that WWII was the biggest catastrophe for White Nationalism and at the same time cheer the Greatest Generation which brought us into this mess.
2) There is no need to distance ourselves from those fighting on a different front and call them “Anti-American”. Experience has shown it is not even honored by the MSM or our enemies.
3) Your discussion experience is probably different, but in the circles where I have to defend our cause, my leftist opponents rapidly see that the goals of White Nationalism are very close to some un-namable movements. The only honest response is “well, maybe not everything, but these goals, they got it right”.
Yeah, but you have to admit it’s very liberating for the initiate to learn the truth of these matters. Even if one doesn’t take up the discredited memes, the notion that our airways are clogged with lamentations over things that never really happened has been about the most unsettling realization of my life. I agree that it can be off putting as a proselytizing point however. There needs to be some compartmentalization or stairway revelation strategy.
I wonder what Gregory Hood’s take on this would be.
I disagree, Greg. I think America will split up. Watch this year and 2020 as the multicultural left reacts with full force. And may I remind you that even if you deal with the Asian and Mexican Americans, which most likely you won’t, you are still left with the Jewish and Black Americans. And every one of them thinks they are American. They aren’t leaving, they aren’t going anywhere. And they are reproducing.
You’re hanging on. That’s understandable. But instead of wanting something that can’t be had, why not focus instead on post collapse possibilities?
Embrace the reality. America – Rome – is finished. During such times, there is always room for creative developments.
And that talking point may make you sound edgy, but it won’t help you to make more White Americans wake up. The majority of White Americans identify too strongly with Americanism. That is the vehicle that will help us spread our message, so that is the vehicle we must use, like it or not.
2020, I suspect, will be a very significant year, not only in American History, but in all of World history.
The Catholic church is rotten to the core and is a huge problem today. I am a non-practicing Catholic having spent 18 years of my life in Catholic school. I totally understood why Protestants opposed it years ago with the nonsense of the pope dictating all kinds of things.
With that being said, the Catholic church of today is as left wing as it could be – socialist/communist/Jewish for all intents and purposes. When I was in Catholic school in the 70s they were already ramming the diversity agenda down our throats. I remember all the films showing the poor minorities and the bad things that whites did to them. I also remember them indoctrinating us that the Jews are our friends. Hell, the Catholic schools I went to used to educate us on the Jewish holidays and than have us participate in them.
One big problem is that I got to experience the glories of diversity each and every day to/from school where I was attacked, robbed and beaten by groups of black kids. So much for diversity. Needless to say I have been racially aware since I was a kid.
I only read recently about Jewish penetration of the Catholic church and how they influenced Vatican II which changed everything. Witness the constant slobbering of the Catholic church on Jews and Muslims. Which explained the indoctrination that I received as a child. Older Catholics had no idea that this was going on.
Lest people think I am just picking on the Catholics, the Protestants are doing the exact same thing with their diversity nonsense. All are slobbering on minorities, Jews and Muslims. Except for the pope worship they are the exact same deal.
I see people above are making comments about non-Anglo Saxon whites. I completely agree and that Anglo Saxons founded America. I also venerate and respect them for what they did, however the Catholic whites are not the problem, the real problem is the WASPs who sold out the country to the Jews. The Irish and Italians were never lovers of diversity. The WASPs on the other hand were quite eager to slobber all over minorities like Jews and blacks.
Anglophiles very conveniently forget that it wasn’t the Italians, Irish, Spanish, Greeks, Swedes and others that got in bed with the Jews. Never forget it for a second that WASP’s got in bed with them all the way back to WW1. And they got further in bed with them before WW2 due to Roosevelt putting them in the govmt. And it has been this way ever since.
The WASPs foolishly allowed the Jews to take over their very own institutions such as Ivy League schools, the media and banks. For example I am not sure today that a single Ivy League university has a non-Jewish president. Both the media and academia is totally controlled by the Jews. Its been going on for a very long time already, if you include WW1, its 100 years at this point.
Frankly I don’t see any of these people being evicted out of the country short of a civil war. Thanks to the proposition nation that has been pushed for DECADES at this point ie. we are all Americans because we believe in ABC. Realize that because the media and academia are totally controlled by the left and Jews, American history as it used to be taught in schools is no longer taught. They are taught all about white oppression, racism and other crap. How are people going to unwind decades of indoctrination?
I don’t know what the answer is but I can say for a fact that even liberals are now noticing the blatant anti-white bias in the media and schools.
As my father says, at some point there is going to be an event and than all hell is going to break loose. The country is completely balkanized, there will never be going back to the way it was.
Almost none are patriotic to America anymore. Even most “conservatives” are more loyal to The State of Israel than to their own country. Of course, if the WASP population, of America, were truly logically consistent in their entire Ideological Worldview, than it would follow that they would be loyal to the British Crown, and not only share their British cousin’s hatred of Germans, but also their British cousins’ disdain for the Irish as well.
The United States of America, as such, does not exist, at least not anymore. Was never a National State, but merely a Multinational State. Others seem to believe that since the first Black Slave arrived on American shores, that American Whites forfeited their privilege of ever having their own White Ethnostate.
The best essay i have read on this subject…i have always identified as an American Nationalist…i was born in 1950s….Our existence as White Americans has been threatened severely since 1965….I am confident this will turn in our direction soon….as our people are waking up…..
“It is not titles that honor men but men that honor titles” — Niccolo Machiavelli
“American” is an acceptable title for us if it can become recognized by our own people as having a white ethnic connotation — and if this definition of American identity is to be adopted it must be able to not only attract mediocre individuals but also those with the greatest agency to pull off an ethnic nationalist project for American whites.
I agree with Dr. Johnson whole heartedly regarding the fact true American Nationalism is White Nationalism. It is relatively easy to open white eyes to this fact and the consequences of rejecting it. I can remember, not long ago, attempting to reconcile civic nationalist views with contradicting citizenship requirements of early America. The mental gymnastics involved to do so were more than I could bear. The Fourteenth Amendment and change in immigration laws fundamentally changed what it meant to be an American citizen, thus what America is as a state. The question is whether the change in course has benefited our nation. Whites need to be confronted with the question, are these changes from the founders original intent legitimate if they have resulted in the forfeiture of our birthright? The vast majority of whites should understand these changes have been detrimental to their self-interests. Moreover, those attempting to steal our inheritance don’t even want it for themselves (not even in the civic nationalist sense) they only seek to destroy it for us- destroy us. Andrew Anglin correctly observes in his article “Jews Officially Handing America Back to the Americans” that the recent anthem protest at football games illustrated the non-white hordes never were America. White people have an obligation to initiate conversations with other whites about this subject. People almost always act in their own perceived self-interests, so whites only need to be made aware. The truth is easy to see, even through the propaganda, if only confronted with it!
I don’t agree that historical revisionism is futile, for several reasons:
– Major historical events were used as tools of our enemies to gain power. Illustrating this fact serves as a warning to not be fooled again. For example, Syria or Ukraine could’ve been disasters for America if we got dragged in, but by having the “Anti-American” facts about past wars, it proved too unpopular to sell to the public.
– The lies about the past serve as justification for the present. If Americans still believe in the Holocaust, they’ll think any anti-egalitarian ideals will inevitably lead to slaughter.
– Like it or not, our enemies do control the government, and one election has not changed that. Pointing out how consistently they lie, time and again, is the surest way to undermine them. Who can believe the NYT after they learn about their cover-up of the Holodomor?
This isn’t to say we should lead with that, but it can be an important follow up in a debate. One powerful use of it was when Trump said he wanted to put “America First”. This is both rhetorically powerful in itself and it hearkens to a military isolationism that’s been demonized by the left and neocons. In one phrase he repudiated the left’s most powerful weapon.
It is a hard pill to swallow and was for me also but me like other secessionists we see the demographics and corruption of modern America and do not see how it could be saved as a whole. We see a loss of meaning to our flag and symbols for even the left uses them in their propaganda. We also don’t see how we can work within the system that be. You don’t have to be a flag burner to see collapse already underway. Now if I could be an American nationalist and a revolutionary/secessionist maybe that’s something we could get behind better.
This was a fantastic essay ! White Americans have a fantastic legacy as a nation. I am sick and tired of neoreactionaries making false claims about American politics and the Founding. As White Americans, we need to take the best from our history philosophically, politically, and culturally. I wrote about American Republicanism and all it’s great benefits, provided that the majority or all of the citizenry is white.
Un saludo Camarada Greg Johnson, tengo una pregunta ¿Usted cree que una interpretación similar a la suya sobre los EEUU es aplicable a países como Sudáfrica o incluso países como Argentina, donde yo resido? Pregunto sobre Argentina puesto que hay quienes sostienen una reflexión similar a la suya pero adaptada a la situación de la República Argentina. Incluso en libros editados en los años 20 y 30 se pueden leer afirmaciones de que la Argentina era una Nación Blanca al menos para un porcentaje bastante grande de la población. Agradecería mucho que pudiera contestarme, un abrazo.
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.
Edit your comment