Counter-Currents
The Recapture of Buda in 1686 by Gyula Benczúr (1896)
1,869 words
In times of crisis, it seems that there are always people prone to engage in pointless discussions, like those sons of Byzantium who debated about the sex of angels while they were besieged by the Ottoman invaders — an encirclement that would result in the suppression of their millenary empire. Today, the threat is not trivial, either: No less than one of the primary races on the planet, the white race, is at risk of being eradicated from the face of the Earth through a genocide of replacement, infertility, and miscegenation. And yet, there are individuals who insist on maintaining a divisive attitude towards other blood-related peoples.
These sterile and fratricidal quarrels within the white world operate in multiple directions, and each faction has a different ethnic or national candidate to exclude from the struggle and from a future White Union. There are Germanophobes, Italophobes, and Anglophobes, among others; but we can summarize it by saying that the main sectors are the anti-North American, anti-Slavic, anti-Mediterranean, and anti-Latin American ones. Needless to say, we are not talking here about laughable conservative concepts such as “castizo futurism” or its Nazbol version, with a Eurasianist White-Mongoloid hybrid nationalism, but only about divisive and exclusionary tendencies against whites living in these areas of the world.
Thus, some Europeans think that Americans should be removed from the Revolution and limit the latter to a struggle for the European continent, the European continent and Russia, or even Eurasia — or the European continent plus Islam, and other, even more bizarre combinations. If many “patriotic” movements in Europe are anti-American, it is basically due to US interventionism and the whole series of unjust wars that the Lobby — that is to say, Jewry — has pushed the country to engage in for its exclusive advantage, especially in the Middle East. This has been an interventionism that has broken with the isolationist approach that the United States traditionally maintained with respect to the rest of the world, as well as with the friendly reciprocal relations that the US and the Arab had enjoyed until the creation of the Zionist State. Submitting to the Jews that has been seriously damaging the interests of the US as a country ever since it drove the Arab countries into the arms of the Soviet Union, alienating the US in the process along with half the world, including a multitude of its oil suppliers and former strategic allies.
There are no geopolitical reasons or any other interests linking the destiny of the US to that of Israel, but only the need for American politicians to win the support — or at least the approval — of the all-powerful Jewish media empire in the US in order to get elected. This dependence alone creates the aforementioned subordination of the US to the interests of Jewry. But the important thing is that the interests of the American people and those of Jewry do not coincide, any more than those of a colony coincide with those of its metropolis. It is an unnatural “alliance,” — a relatively recent one, and one that, a fortiori, will not last much longer.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s The White Nationalist Manifesto here
There is of course no doubt that posing oneself as anti-American is a very politically correct attitude that arouses broad sympathy across the Old Continent, but noticing the Jewish domination over that America to which they attribute so many wrongs is far from being so. And that is why anti-Americans will never be able to make an accurate analysis of political reality, for they prefer to ignore the fact that most American White Nationalists hate their government in Washington, DC even more than they do.
Also, there are those who are anti-Russian, or anti-Slavs in general, either for ethnic or political reasons. Among them are mainly the opponents of former Soviet Communism, since the white peoples who lived (or survived, one might say) under the Marxist regime in the past were mainly Slavs. This anti-Russian/anti-Slavic type has declined greatly in numbers since the fall of the Soviet bloc, as is to be expected, although there are still too many of them left. In the US, we are once again faced with the old and fallacious habit of identifying the executioners with the martyrs; that is, confusing the supporters — of Communism, in this case — with the peoples who in reality constituted the bulk of its victims. As victims of the misery and famines brought about by the Marxist economy, and used as cannon fodder for Soviet expansionist imperialism and slave labor for its gulags, these peoples paid for their disaffection with the regime with tens of millions of deaths.
Some others, on the other hand, think that the Aryans to be excluded should be the Mediterranean Europeans. The supporters of this idea are frequently people who have not even checked in situ whether the mental vision they have created of the inhabitants of these regions is correct, or else they are pseudo-pagan Nordicists who believe in the mythical and remote origins of their favorite sub-race in Atlantis or some Ultima Thule. This stems in lage part from the erroneous impression that sharing hair and eye pigmentation with other races implies the existence of some kind of late link with them as a result of miscegenation. Obviously, this is an unfounded belief. Significantly, no one claims that yellows are more closely related or interbred with blacks because they share the same iris or hair color.
The white race is very diverse in appearance: redheads with blue eyes, blondes with brown eyes, brunettes with green eyes, and so on. If among the wide phenotypic variety of our race there is a group in which dark eyes and dark hair predominate (the Mediterranean and even the Alpine), this does not mean that it is attributable to interbreeding with other racial groups. In fact, light eye colors are relatively recent mutations which appeared in the white race when it was already formed. For example, blue eyes did not exist until about 8,000 years ago. In the beginning, all whites had brown eyes. The same is true of blond hair, a mutation that occurred only 11,000 years ago. The white race, however, has existed for about 30,000 years or more. The Mediterranean is one of the five existing Aryan sub-races, together with the Nordic, Alpine, Dinaric, and Eastern Baltic.
Let’s keep in mind that, to a large extent, the myth of Nordic exclusivism — or of Mediterranean exclusion — has been promoted precisely by those enemies of the white race who deliberately seek its division. We have all been taught from school that the Führer was fascinated with the “Nordic race” and that National Socialism only regarded this particular sub-race as the Aryan race. In fact, if you look in Adolf Hitler’s writings and speeches for this alleged Nordicist obsession, you will not find it.
This same strategy of division is intended to cause a feeling of exclusion from other whites among Latin America’s white community, as well as a disaffection towards them among the White Nationalists of North America and Europe. This anti-Latin American inclination is based on the (typically liberal) nonsense of believing that, by being born elsewhere, a race ceases to be itself.
We could also cite, as yet another example, the case of the micronationalism of some alleged White Nationalists who demand independence for regions such as Catalonia or the Basque Country, not hesitating to promote resentment against other brother peoples for the sake of such secessions, even if this does not entail any strategic advantage for the white struggle. The stateisms — that is to say, the nationalisms of the already constituted nation-states, sometimes in confrontation with other states as well for historical reasons, are another aspect of the same problem.
Conclusion
As we can see, the misgivings of these stupid anti-unionisms have their origin in two sources. The first is a distrust due to questions of an ideological nature; that is to say, because of the political regime prevailing in a specific territory, as in the case of the US or the USSR, without even considering whether or not such a regime was imposed on the population from outside (and, let us not be naive, a two-party mediocracy does not imply a ruling elite that is more in accordance with the popular will than any other type of dictatorial regime). The other is a contempt on the part of hyperdifferentialists that has its roots in ethnic issues; that is, because they believe that some white ethnicities and sub-races are not white enough.
There is a third source as well, which is sometimes a mixture of the other two, that is motivated by historical quarrels and controversies (past conflicts, a belief in different origins, imperialism, or religious wars or territorial disputes from times when decisions were made by monarchs and the people had little influence).
There are various anti-unionist factions, even opposing ones — each one with its least favorite group, about which they differ. But what they all agree on is to put the cart before the horse. We do not know what conditions of mobility there will be between the regions of the future White Union. We do not know for sure if a unitary, federal, or confederal model will finally be implemented. We do not even know which white ethnic groups will survive into the future, because some may not wake up in time. Now is therefore not the time to build the roof, but rather the foundations. The hour is too late to go around putting sticks in our wheels with hypertrophied puritanisms or artificial states’ chauvinisms.
In these times of crisis, we cannot afford to exclude fellow racial compatriots or blithely reject allies. Precisely having done so in the past has led us to our present situation. The Second World War was lost for this reason. And the future revolution that the white world needs to undergo in order to survive will fail if any of its parts are once again excluded, no matter where they may live.
It is worth remembering this because we are a race so intoxicated by the media that we do not even have a clear awareness of who we are anymore. In contrast, our enemies have a much clearer vision of our identity and their own. They know who they hate and who they are fighting. It is not a particular white ethnicity, but the race as a whole. They see clearly, with a deep perspective and without our blinders, that despite minor differences, we members of the white race are a unit. It does not matter to them whether a particular white country participated in “the” colonization or was instead colonized by them. It is not a historical, political, or ethnic question for them; they think in racial terms. Thus, if our thinking remains more fragmented and less cohesive than theirs, we will lose.
This is how we must think if we are to survive the genocide we are undergoing. As Kevin Strom (ADV 2020-06-20, On the Cusp) said, “We are targeted and marked for death as Whites. It is as Whites — not as dolichocephalic Red Nordids, or Paleo-Atlantids, or western Europeans only — that we must become awakened and fight back.”
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “Paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
- Third, Paywall members have the ability to edit their comments.
- Fourth, Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
- Fifth, Paywall members will have access to the Counter-Currents Telegram group.
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Paywall Gift Subscriptions
If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:
- your payment
- the recipient’s name
- the recipient’s email address
- your name
- your email address
To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.
14 comments
I find that a significant percentage of this divisive rhetoric also comes from nonwhites and anti-whites who seek to sow division and problematize white identity. Some white men, because they’re desperate for any kind of nonwhite approval and because they want to couch their position as anything except white racial identitarianism, will enthusiastically welcome and repeat such rhetoric.
Suffice to say, this has to stop.
Excellent essay. It’s typical of the Racial Right that there’s an argument about how to use power they will never have to exclude people who really don’t care.
Something to think about – many oppose the EU in its current state because it infringes on national sovereignty, and leads to a perceived oppression of southern/eastern states by Germany and its French ally (e.g. the EU forbade Poland to create a separate corporate tax bracket for large corporations, as those were disproportionately Western European). The removal of borders between European nations also makes it easier for POC to diffuse throughout the continent like drops of coffee in a cup of milk.
So while union is of course very important, there are also threats in hyper-integration to the internal diversity of white peoples. An expanded NATO, to include all white nations, and an institution that is mainly trade-focused (with maybe a FRONTEX division for collective border security), like the early EU, is a better way towards unionism than the current EU.
Thanks for your comment, sir.
Honestly, I would only care about preserving our national sovereignty if my country’s government was better than the usual EU bureaucrats. Otherwise, I just don’t care (which is precisely the case).
That being said, this essay is focused, not so much on practical issues related to the different unions of White countries today ―which are only so in a casual and unconscious way―, but to the theoretical wish of exclusion against some White peoples within White Nationalists.
And, of course, when I mentioned a White Union, I was referring to a hypothetical future union of fully racially conscious White peoples, which might have to be built more in opposition to such present unions than building on them. Therefore, we start from the premise that none of these countries would allow the entry and diffusion of non-White invaders.
Other than that, I would reserve the term hyper-integrationists only for those who seek union with obviously non-White or racially mixed peoples, such as the Turks (who, by the way, have been trying for years to be accepted into the EU).
It is a hard enough task to convince whites who are unambiguously white to adopt a racial identity, let alone marginal and “off-white” cases like Italians and Asiatic Russians who don’t consider themselves white-white in the first place.
If there is no union by attraction from within, there will be union by repulsion from without. Anti-White hatred does not take such things into consideration, and non-Whites will always treat all Whites equally. This can only be a unifying force for us, it will make all Whites understand that we have the same interests and that, if White individuals want to survive in this racial conflict, they will have to join their racial brethren.
In a sense, the fact that the Jews have imposed their Ethnostate in the midst of Arab countries that hate them has greatly unified the Jewish people and its factions, despite being a race with important internal ethnic differences. This, for example, has been noted by many sociologists. Besides, the “Holocaust” narrative has not only served as moral blackmail to make others bend to their desires, but also to unify their own people.
The bottom line is, every day we wake up, whoever of us who wakes up aware of our identity and of the existential imperative for doing so, and is who we have to work and fight with that day. As the screws tighten, that number will grow.
I am not sold that Italians don’t see themselves as white. My time in Italy Italians were the most open and vocal anti of any immigrant group. They loathed the Albanians because they can in and bus loads of them flipped off Italians while being paid to come into their country and idle about.
All such thought and talk is self defeating. Whatever mindset and self talk the Visigoths in Asturias had in the 8 – 13th centuries had is what we need. If we are the advocates for our people and what we exude is despair then who will join our cause?
Will we be like the legends of Asturias for our people in the dark days? We must be if we are to survive.
Exactly. The myth that Italians are not White only exists within the United States, spread by old Protestant zealots who sought to deny their racial kinship with other Catholic White peoples just because they don’t share their faith, the majority religion in the country. What happened to the Irish is not much different.
“Off-White” is a popular fashion brand in Italy. I’ll leave it at that when it comes to Italians.
As for external pressure, it won’t change anything, it will just mean Zoomers will keep relocating to the next white suburb (Zoomers are a pretty muddy, off-white demographic as it is). “More demographic pressure means more white solidarity” is wishful thinking at best and downright dangerous at worse. If anti-white hatred helps raise white racial consciousness (it doesn’t) and makes white racial consciousness socially attractive (it doesn’t) then by that logic white advocates should be paying our enemies.
I had never heard of “Off-White”, but I see that its founder is a Black, and I doubt very much that more than a marginal percentage of Italians know what the name means, in case it has any racial connotation at all.
The fact that anti-White hatred helps raise White racial consciousness is something easily demonstrated by the fact that the vote for anti-immigration parties is much higher where there are racial aliens than where there are not. If it was true that their hatred and presence and crime doesn’t help raise White racial consciousness, the vote wouldn’t be just equal to the rest of the areas, but much lower -because racial aliens don’t vote for such parties. It is easy not to be racist in Portland, but it is “somewhat” more difficult in Atlanta or other cities in the South.
It is not a matter of making White racial consciousness “socially attractive”, because it is a matter of survival. It’s not without a good reason that the prison population is racially self-segregated. For survival. And relocating to the next White suburb is no a permanent solution, because there are fewer and fewer White suburbs to flee to. Therefore, sooner or later, Whites will be forced to organize racially, as they are starting to do.
Asier is right. I for example was never racially conscious, and I was committed to America as the propositional nation. The ever intensifying anti-white and anti-white-male discrimination and vitriol pushed me here. It did so for precisely the reason Asier others will too. This is not a quibble over policy, it is about our livelihoods, the ability to live in peace, and ultimately the survival of me and my posterity. I may be different than others here. I am not anti other races. The other tribes have left me no choice. The have declared war on me and on us. Anyone who can’t see that is a fool, in deep denial or completely lost.
There are tens of millions like me who are going to wake up and realize that they are a part of the only group that committed to being individuals in the melting pot, to equality under the law, and that the consequences of that have been devastating and where we are headed next is somewhere worse. They are going to realize that some army chose their uniform for them and that it is the very form they were born into. They are going to realize that some army declared war on them, and did so with such guile and cunning that when the realizations come, a fire will erupt inside of those who were born men of quality but lacked the circumstance to realize it.
Beau – Yes. Italians were never considered non-white. The issue the Anglicans had with Italians and other Southern Europeans was Catholicism vs. Protestantism. They questioned the cultural compatibility, (work ethic, lower trust and more prone to in-group preferences …), of the Italians who came from a much lower trust society. There was never any question of if they were white or European. Similarly with Eastern Europeans and Jews, the issue was with cultural compatibility and preserving the cultural fabric of the nation as that fabric was bound to a specific people, and to the Protestant faith.
I came from Southern Europeans, but they wholly committed to the American identity – to the point that using any, “aren’t we a (hyphenated nationality/ethnos)-American”, term earned a harsh scolding and rebuke. I suspect that depending on which region of the country your ancestors settled into determines in part how committed to and how rapidly the American identity was adopted. East – very strong. West – not strong.
I stand behind what I said about defeatism and despair.
The story that Italians and Irish used to be considered non-White is being pushed – especially by certain (((leftist academics))) – to bolster the argument that “race is a social construct”. The truth is that if Italians and Irish were considered non-White, they wouldn’t have been allowed into the USA until 1965.
”Aryan” means only the Nordic type in Racial Science, so cope harder.
In fact, if you look in Adolf Hitler’s writings and speeches for this alleged Nordicist obsession, you will find this:
”Humanity owes everything great to struggle and to one race which has triumphed. Take away the Nordic German and all that remains is APE DANCES”
-Adolf Hitler, speech 2. April 1927
“Today in our German national body we still possess great unmixed stocks of Nordic Germanic people whom we may consider the most precious treasure for our future.”
-Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf Volume 2. Chapter 2.
For the organization of a Russian state formation was not the result of the political abilities of the Slavs in Russia, but only a wonderful example of the state-forming efficacity of the Germanic element in an INFERIOR race.”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf Volume 2. Chapter 14.
”Not only in Austria, but in Germany as well, so-called national circles were moved by similar false ideas. The Polish policy, demanded by so many, involving a Germanization of the East, was unfortunately based on the same false inference. Here again it was thought that a Germanization of the Polish element could be brought about by a purely linguistic integration with the German element. Here again the result would have been catastrophic; a people of ALIEN RACE expressing its alien ideas in the German language, compromising the lofty dignity of our own nationality by their own INFERIORITY.”
-Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf Volume 2. Chapter 2.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Edit your comment