Print this post Print this post

Ruuben Kaalep on the Intermarium

Ruuben Kaalep

2,928 words

At the end of summer, Ruuben Kaalep came to Hungary at the invitation of the Hungarian nationalist party Mi Hazánk (Our Homeland). Ruuben Kaalep is one of the main advocates for the Intermarium project, a political and geostrategic plan aiming to regroup the Baltic countries, the Visegrád 4, Ukraine, Croatia, Slovenia, Belarus, Moldova, and Romania, forming a kind of a triangle between the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea, and the Adriatic Sea.

Although this list changes from time to time, sometimes including other Balkan countries, the Scandinavian countries, or even Austria, the Intermarium’s aim stays the same: to coordinate cooperation among the countries of Central and Eastern Europe — with the notable exception of Russia — in order to protect the interests of the region.

For its supporters, the project is the best way to preserve the way of life, security, and independence of the CEE countries, by “freeing them from Western domination and protecting them from Russian imperialism.”

The Intermarium project is not a new idea, although its revival gained visibility after the Maïdan revolution and the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, which the advocates of the Intermarium perceived as new Russian aggression necessitating regional cooperation to avoid such a thing in the future.

One hundred years ago, the post-WW1 reborn Polish state was dreaming of rebuilding the great Polish empire connecting the Baltic and the Black Seas, known as the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, able to contain Russia. This Międzymorze — “between-seas” — project of the Polish elites also included countries such as Hungary, Yugoslavia, Finland, Czechoslovakia, and Romania, making it the first modern project to bring together the CEE countries. Placed between Russia and the West, cutting off the Balkans from the rest of Europe, this geopolitical project always had many critics in both Russia and the West. Nowadays, if the Intermarium is mostly a little-known, pan-nationalist project, advocated mainly by Ukrainian, Balt, Croatian, and Polish political groups, the Three Seas Initiative can be seen as an implementation of Intermarium’s basic idea.

Intermarium has bigger ambitions than the announced goals of the Three Seas Initiative (gathering Baltic countries, the V4, Austria, Slovenia, Croatia, Romania, and Bulgaria) which is built on an energy and transportation cooperation scheme aiming to guarantee energy independence of the CEE countries from Russia while being financed by the USA. For the advocates of the Intermarium project, the future of the region should lie on the rejection of three main enemies: Russia, NATO, and communism.

Ferenc Almássy met with Ruuben Kaalep while he was in Hungary in order to discuss his advocacy of the Intermarium project.

In red, a version of the Intermarium, gathering Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary, Croatia, and Slovenia.

Ferenc Almássy: You are a member of the Estonian Parliament, but you are, can we say, a nationalist? Can you accept this epithet?

Ruuben Kaalep: Absolutely. A nationalist is what I am. It’s the main thing for me.

FA: So how is it possible that in Estonia nationalists are part of the governing coalition?

RK: Right. Well, first of all, if you ask this from a Western European perspective, then things are very different right now between Western and Eastern Europe, ideologically different. Because what we see in Western Europe is that the people there, the dominant culture, have totally lost their sense of the sacredness of national and ethnic identity.

I think in some ways the division between Eastern and Western Europe is still being decided by our history; namely, the fact that our countries were dominated by Communist occupation for a long time and our national identity was forcibly suppressed. We have a strong counter-reaction to that. We feel that, in a way, the globalist Left-liberal ideology that is pushed upon us by the West is something very similar to Communism because it’s also totalitarian. It doesn’t accept other points of view that are outside the officially accepted paradigm. That’s one thing.

Now, how did it happen in Estonia that we first got to be a party with seats in Parliament, and then we entered the government? For a long time, there was a need in Estonian mainstream politics for something genuinely nationalist. There was a lack of it in the 1990s and after. That was what I felt as a high school student who was interested in history, culture, nature, and so on. I was reading about Estonian history: the War of Independence, the Second World War, the freedom fighters, the Forest Brothers who fought long after the Second World War ended. They waged partisan war against the Communists. And I felt that something of that spirit was really lacking among the Estonian elite that was in power.

FA: In political representation?

RK: Yes, exactly. But the genuine nationalist groups at that time were small and divided. They fought against each other. They didn’t really have strong political perspectives until our party was founded in 2012. And it was founded out of the merger of a small but active nationalist group which I was previously a member of with an old, conservative agrarian party that had fallen out of the Parliament and which had lost all of its leaders. Its leaders had corruption scandals and things like that, and they escaped to other liberal parties. What was left was the structure of the party with many members who were totally normal Estonian people, mainly from the countryside, and they needed a clear ideology and clear leadership, which we nationalists provided. That’s how we built the party.

We started off right away as a strongly nationalist party. We stood up for all the things that were ignored by other parties. We raised the questions that no one dared to ask about the future of our Estonian ethnicity.

FA: Like demographics, for example?

RK: Yes. Demographics, family values, all those sorts of things. That led to us becoming a parliamentary party in 2015. Our success story continued in 2019 when we entered Parliament with 19 members out of 101, making us the third-largest party in Estonia. This was because of the inner divide between liberals in Estonia. The two main parties in Estonia are liberal, but they have a long history of hating each other more than they care about liberal values. So we became a coalition partner with the Centre Party against another liberal party, the Reform Party, which is the main opposition party.

FA: We are meeting in Hungary because you came to speak at a conference of the Hungarian nationalist party, Mi Hazánk, and you were debating with one of their MPs on the topic of Intermarium. Many people reading the Visegrád Post know about Intermarium. We are one of the few reporting on this. It’s strange, by the way, that it has received very little media coverage, but that’s another topic.

In brief, this Intermarium project is usually either unknown or is seen in two different ways. One is a very optimistic vision of a fantasy Eastern Europe as the last stronghold of European culture. The other is that it’s seen as a tool of the United States to contain Russia. This is usually what you hear when people speak about Intermarium, at least in Western Europe, but also in Hungary. How would you answer both of these points of view?

RK: First of all, I wouldn’t say we were debating with Dóra Dúró [Mi Hazánk Member of Parliament evoked in the question] because we agreed on pretty much everything. I absolutely think that Intermarium, or a geopolitical alliance between Central and Eastern European countries — the countries that have the weakest economies and a strong nationalist sentiment and sense of national identity — are already starting to understand what is happening in Western Europe, such as the migration situation, where they are allowing their own people to become minorities in their own countries. We understand that we can’t let this happen to our countries. So this is what unites us, and we need to cooperate, and we need to stick together, and we need to help each other, because that’s the only hope that the European people as a whole have right now. We are keeping the fire alive, while it is dead in the West.

FA: So you would say that the primary aim of this cooperation is to avoid the West’s liberal mistakes?

RK: Yes. And it would absolutely be different from the essence of the European Union in every sense, because the EU is built on different countries with very different values. They talk about European values, but what they consider European values are just a universalist, colonialist mindset from a globalist perspective. They don’t see the importance of rootedness in specific cultures or specific nationalities. We have that sense. It’s a very essential thing. That’s why we are able to see the danger to the whole of Europe and all European people, which is an existential danger. It’s the danger of extinction by being replaced by other cultures and other races, as is happening in Western Europe. We can only stop this and we can only save our countries if we do it together.

FA: In what way, specifically? For example, the Visegrád Group is an informal group. There is no legal structure. It’s an ad hoc structure. What are you thinking of?

RK: I think we need to put those legal agreements in place, and we need to unite all of this. There are many forms of diplomatic cooperation between these countries that —

FA: That already exist.

RK: There’s already strong cooperation between the Baltic countries, there’s the Three Seas Initiative, different projects with Ukraine and Belarus —

FA: The Slavkov Triangle and so on, yes.

RK: Yes. We need to unite them, but it has to be on a completely different foundation than the EU. It will not work if it’s forced down from above, from some power structure that tries to ignore the differences between various cultures and peoples. The idea of the EU is that they hope that these differences will just go away. This is a soft form of globalism. If you’re trying to turn Europe into one uniform part of this global supermarket, it doesn’t work.

Your previous question was about geopolitics. I think what is very clear by now is that American influence on world politics is fading. It’s going away. They have so many domestic problems: racial conflicts, political conflicts. They will no longer be able to play this role of world police or of the global hegemon that they once had.

FA: It is also true that even if they were able to do so, they will probably not be able to do so at the same level, at least in Europe, because they are refocusing on the Pacific and China.

RK: Right. I think that in terms of geopolitics, the Intermarium countries have been dependent on American protection for decades. So there are risks. If American influence goes away, and we don’t stick together, if we’re not able to build our own strong geopolitical bloc, then we will become the playground of new empires like Russia or China who are only out for their own interests and don’t care about national values or ethnic nationalism, which is the main uniting ideological factor for our countries.

We need to be able to play on the global stage, and for that, we need to put our forces together and support each other. But it has to be a voluntary alliance, not like the EU.

FA: Just to get back to the second part of my previous question; some people criticize the idea of Intermarium as a satellite American project to contain Russia. What is your response to that?

RK: As I said earlier, America is no longer in a position to control what’s going on in the world, so there’s no point to these conspiracy theories that hold everything as a tool of world government or something. If we put our forces together, that’s the only way for our countries to really stay independent, to focus on preserving our cultures and our countries. That’s the only way we can do it. If it’s a genuine cooperative project, it cannot be a tool or a puppet of any empire. We need to be able to stand up for our countries, and we can only do it together.

FA: If you had to put the principles of this cooperation and the essence of this Intermarium project in only a few words, what would they be?

RK: It has to be based on the idea of national and ethnic self-determination. As a nationalist, I do believe that you can only respect other nations if you respect your own, and you can only respect your own nation if you respect others. There’s this old, stupid idea that nationalists of different countries are always supposed to hate each other. I think this is totally wrong.

FA: When people speak about nationalism in this way, they’re actually speaking about chauvinism.

RK: Exactly. For almost a decade now, I have been meeting with nationalists from many different European countries. Every time, my experience in international nationalist meetings has been that I feel that this is the best chance for the true freedom of nations and the acceptance and cherishing of the true diversity that we have. This is what we stand for. What makes the world beautiful is the real diversity that comes from every nation having their own land. I think that’s the most important thing. This idea should be at the spiritual core of Intermarium.

Now, in practical terms, I think that as long as the EU exists — I don’t think it will be a factor in the long run, because there are too many divisive issues within the EU that will cause it to collapse sooner or later — we need to always stand up for each other. When the globalists try to attack Hungary, for example, then we need all of the countries of Intermarium to unite and support Hungary. And it should be exactly like that for any other Intermarium countries.

What we also need — and I think in the longer term, it will be crucial — is military cooperation, because without that, we won’t be a strong geopolitical force.

FA: You mean cooperation independent of NATO, or within NATO?

RK: Not all of the countries of Intermarium, such as Ukraine, are NATO members. So it will have to be a different format. Including Ukraine is crucial for Intermarium, because in geopolitics, economics, and all of these factors, Ukraine is in a very decisive position.

FA: You are one of the main advocates of Intermarium in the international scene. In which countries and among which political groups do you see the most support for and understanding of this project?

RK: I think the biggest proponents are the Baltic nationalists, who have a very good experience cooperating with each other, have no conflicts with each other, and understand that we are facing the same threats. This is especially so with the Ukrainian nationalists, who are also very active proponents of Intermarium, because they have been very much left alone in their struggle against Russian occupation. I would like to see more support for that in the future from the Visegrád countries, because I think the Visegrád Group is the best example of that kind of cooperation that should eventually be expanded into a strong geopolitical bloc as Intermarium.

I’m optimistic about this. I see more and more people in this region understanding that we have a common past, but that we also have a common future, and we have common issues and common threats. So I think this is the most important thing.

FA: In this Intermarium project, most of the Balkan countries are not usually included. Why do you not also see a common fate with them?

RK: I think the biggest problem that hinders the integration of Intermarium is old border conflicts between many of these countries, such as between Poland and Lithuania, Hungary and Romania, and so on. In the Balkans, it is much worse. Take the conflict between the Serbians and Croatians, for example. There was a real war not so long ago, and I think it’s very hard to erase that memory. In those countries that I mentioned, we should never allow things to get that bad, because we shouldn’t forget that if we start fighting against each other, then we will lose all of Europe.

Right now, all of our countries are being threatened by the same problem: the same threat from this globalist project that is erasing all national identities. To stop that, we need to put our differences aside, even temporarily. We can only be successful if we can do that. Ideally, I would like to see all of the Balkan countries become part of Intermarium, but I think there needs to be some sort of reconciliation between them to make it possible. In practical terms, we have mostly had talks with the Croatians, who are really on the same page regarding the topic of Intermarium.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published at the Visegrád Post.

If you want to support Counter-Currents, please send us a donation by going to our Entropy page and selecting “send paid chat.” Entropy allows you to donate any amount from $3 and up. All comments will be read and discussed in the next episode of Counter-Currents Radio, which airs every weekend on DLive.

Don’t forget to sign up for the twice-monthly email Counter-Currents Newsletter for exclusive content, offers, and news.

 

11 Comments

  1. Bookai
    Posted November 24, 2020 at 3:38 am | Permalink

    At this stage only ASEAN-type of cooperation is a viable strategy for Intermarium. None of the members fulfills basic prerequisites for the advanced model of integration (like core EU) and, as far as the analogies can go, South America’s integration projects (MERCOSUR or CAN) represent the limits of Eastern European integration. I may eleborate on these points in later comments.

  2. Vehmgericht
    Posted November 24, 2020 at 1:32 pm | Permalink

    This is an interesting, worthwhile and timely project, for already we see active subversion of these stalwart nations by the globalist Left. Characteristically the Reds are not commencing with a frontal assault upon indigenous ethnic identity, although, just as in Western Europe that will be the destination.

    No, their line of attack is presently couched in terms of Feminism (access to abortion and fighting ‘rape culture’) and Civil Rights (without any irony at all, freedom of expression and counter-authoritarianism).

    The Left will seek to seduce the young, especially young women, to whom memories of life under Communism may mean little. Already we see regular editorialising in the global liberal press: NYT, Guardian, BBC, etc, advocating that ‘Poland/Czech Republic/Hungary etc needs to change’ and showcasing activist individuals or groups.

    These are of course the classic tactics of Occult Warfare in the Evolian sense. We in the West who harkened to the same lies and liars in the name of fairness and freedom are now paying the price. We are nearing disposession in our own lands and urgently say to our Eastern brethren: beware!

    • Bookai
      Posted November 25, 2020 at 6:59 am | Permalink

      Already we see regular editorialising in the global liberal press: NYT, Guardian, BBC, etc, advocating that ‘Poland/Czech Republic/Hungary etc needs to change’ and showcasing activist individuals or groups.

      We are changing, it can be best observed in Poland, in big cities either on the Western Wall or Warsaw herself. The disease of liberalism is a consequence of our participation (or subjugation) in the atlantic system of governance. There is no chance in effectively defending ourselves from the rot without withdrawing from the institutional system at least. The greatest gripe for our western overlords is the pace of changing which is unsatisfying, hence the ideas of dividing EU into 2 blocks (or “velocities” as they call it), so the core countries can accelerate the project at desired pace and direction, while leaving the “New Europe for later.

      Until “death to America” becomes just another acceptable slogan, there is really not much room for geopolitical (and civilizational) alternative in Eastern Europe. And since the entire project so far has hinged mostly on american support under Trump (against EU)…It really tells how much thought and consideration had been put into it. There is still much for polish genuine right-wingers (not to be confused with ruling Law & Justice party) to understand how little there is to be saved and salvaged from the West in strategic terms.

  3. Alexandra O.
    Posted November 24, 2020 at 1:47 pm | Permalink

    Are all of the borders of the members of Intermarium closed to immigration from the Middle East and Africa? Also, are any of the members also members of the E.U., and if so, would they be willing to leave? I really applaud your immense work in carving out the possibility of a truly Nationalist group of countries in the Eastern regions of Europe, and I hope and pray it becomes a reality. You in the Eastern European bloc of countries are our last hope of saving any vestige of real ‘European’ culture, history, and civilization. The U.S. is so swamped in ‘diversity’ worship, that many of our people are now committing suicide, and not even thinking of marrying or having kids — except our minorities, which just increases the problem.

    I have only traveled in Bulgaria (since I had friends in America from that country), but I was very impressed with how “European” the country was, and I am sure I could live happily there, though at my age the language would be a trouble, as would the cold weather. But you might work to familiarize our younger people about the benefits of living there. Or, are you so adverse to anything American?! I wouldn’t blame you in the least! Best of everything with this monumental endeavor and do keep us posted right along. I do think that your geographic region is our last, best hope of surviving this horrid “diversity” and “immigration” craze that is facing the entire remnant of White people worldwide.

    • Bookai
      Posted November 25, 2020 at 8:04 am | Permalink

      Are all of the borders of the members of Intermarium closed to immigration from the Middle East and Africa?.

      Not as much closed as undesirable to be crossed by the mentioned parties. There nothing in it for the Levantine and Sub-saharan peoples, when it comes to paying smugglers only to be dropped in countries that are widely regarded (courtesy of liberal media) as racist hell-holes. Even without that glaring warning sign, there is little to be gained from EE economies and welfare systems, especially within the context of average standards of living, which compared to the West, are negligible. For example, my lovely Poland was (before the corona crisis) one of the top immigrated-to countries within EU even after refusing to resettle the “refugees”into our territory. Most of the immigrants were simple from behind our eastern border (mostly Ukrainians) others came from South Asia (Indians), South-East Asia (mostly vietnamese) and Central Asia (post-soviet republics). Those immigrants are useful for under-cutting domestic workers and keeping costs of labor down (our main economic strategy since the 90s), but ultimately they would have to move westwards if they ever covet grand opportunities for career development. That can be best achieved at the top of the global business chains and Poland simply cannot cut it reliably, at least yet.

      Also, are any of the members also members of the E.U., and if so, would they be willing to leave?

      Presumed core countries, yes. They’re not willing to leave, unless the perceived trade-offs become so unbearable the political class is going to utilize public dissatisfaction, in order to either carve a new deal or join a different block. As for theoretical others, for many of them EU is still the desired political direction even if they posses significant internal opposition that gravitates towards Russia, that is especially important in the eastern Balkans.

  4. Eichelhäher
    Posted November 24, 2020 at 11:46 pm | Permalink

    From my limited perspective on the topic I’d still assume it quite the stepping stone to successfully integrate a country that is completely run by a rootless clique, namely Ukraine.
    Additionally, I can see why Russia wouldn’t let go of the ethnically Russian eastern Ukraine – something every nationalist should be able to understand – and that’s why I would think it not advisable to incorporate Ukraine until that conflict is resolved in some way.

    • Bookai
      Posted November 25, 2020 at 10:40 am | Permalink

      Ukrainian system has been compromised in 2014 and as of yet there seem to be no prospects for regaining autonomy. I met and heard about many Ukrainians who decided to start their lives anew in Poland and support their families left behind, so there is also a crisis of hope. As for their rootless oligarchs, if they managed to put nationalists on a leash and sick them on Russia, there is little to threaten them except maybe corpse-in-chief Biden, who may decide to do some reshuffling within his ukrainian fiefdom. Currently Ukraine is engaged in implementation of Association Agreement which involves implementation of EU-friendly regulations. In exchange Ukraine has been granted a preferential treatment when it comes to agricultural exports (among other benefits) which negatively impacted farmer interests in countries like Poland. Therefore, any talk of integrating Ukraine into alternative blocks is a pipe dream at that point.

      It is generally unwise to antagonize Russia in any of such projects. If Intermarium wants any success it should act as an autonomous bridge between East and West. Likewise, the ukrainian question should be solved within that paradigm and turned into another node of regional cooperation. Such issues can be dealt with in a manner of which regional forums of ASEAN (like ASEAN+3) tend to operate in, despite having many differences, conflicting interests and weak economic ties.

  5. inq
    Posted November 25, 2020 at 6:42 am | Permalink

    “For the advocates of the Intermarium project, the future of the region should lie on the rejection of three main enemies: Russia, NATO, and communism.”

    Sorry, but “rejection of main enemy NATO” is a pure lunacy and nonsense.
    And then proposing Intermarium project as an alternative is a double nonsense.
    The only reaction to such idea can be as far as I am concerned: triple the price of vodka !

    Here is another view of this “dead cat” Intermarium project:
    https://sputniknews.com/columnists/201708191056609393-poland-intermarium-plans-can-succeed/

    None of these countries, individually and as a group, have an economic, technological or population potential to become a major regional player.
    The only practical possibility is for these countries to coordinate their regional political and economic policies, and firmly stay within NATO as their only guarantor of national independence and regional security.
    At minimum, they should not ignite inter-state/national/nationality problems as they did for centuries before WW2 and they will be mostly fine.
    They should Learn to cooperate with neighbors, recognize mutual interests and political realities.
    They should not play with fire.

    “… what we see in Western Europe is that the people there, the dominant culture, have totally lost their sense of the sacredness of national and ethnic identity.”
    While true right now to some extent, I do not think it is a long-term trend.
    Note that the center-right parties are strong all over Europe.
    Yes, we are at war, a different kind, called next-generation war.
    The assault by immigrants was a wake-up call (we know the Trojan horses among us); the COVID is a fraud and a psyop. Far more dangerous is the Great Reset that takes advantage of the above to aim at “reinventing capitalism” and “You will own nothing. And you will be happy about it.” aka communism, some say serfdom feudalism.
    This plan by some of degenerated marxists, oligarchs, Big Tech and technocrats will fail.
    It will be rejected by majority of ordinary people and some of governing powers and political classes.
    The EU (aka neo napoleonic or hitlerian pan-european pipe dreams) will either reform to account for nation-state interests and individual civil liberties or it will die by self-inflicted wounds.

    There is no reason to split Europe. Acknowledge the NATO sherif, step into european sand box and play business to your advantage. That’s all.

    • Razvan
      Posted November 25, 2020 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

      Very well explained. This Intermarium Initiative is dubious to say the least, if not a plain FSB diversion.
      I am hopeful too, that the things will sort out regarding the immigration/invasion.

  6. Amory Stern
    Posted November 26, 2020 at 1:27 pm | Permalink

    Intermarium is one of those things that’s a good idea in theory, but is extremely difficult to carry out in practice. If some statesman somewhere in Eastern Europe believed in something like this idea and had any realistic chance of making it happen, then he would have no reason to go around telling everybody about it. Let’s say an Eastern European country wanted to build some kind of army independently of either NATO or Russia. The nation or alliance in question would have to do such a thing quietly, maybe clandestinely, not for the entire world to see.

    Still, it’s not a terrible idea, for those of us who believe in the East but don’t believe in the Kremlin.

    • Razvan
      Posted November 27, 2020 at 12:48 am | Permalink

      “We are not fighting against single individuals. We are exterminating the bourgeoisie as a class. Do not look in materials you have gathered for evidence that a suspect acted or spoke against the Soviet authorities. The first question you should ask him is what class he belongs to, what is his origin, education, profession. These questions should determine his fate. This is the essence of the Red Terror.”
      Martin Latsis

      This is the only thing that Kremlin was/is able to offer.

      The only thing that I can not understand is how someone might hope to convince people with some education and wealth to trust Kremlin to any extent.

      That latvian chekist explains best the rift between elite and the people.

Post a Comment

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

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

*
*

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

  • Our Titles

    White Identity Politics

    The World in Flames

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    From Plato to Postmodernism

    The Gizmo

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

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    Venus and Her Thugs

    Cynosura

    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics

    Rising

    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

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

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles

    Reuben

    The Node

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance