Counter-Currents
Editor’s Note: Yes, I recognize that this picture is unspeakably evil. No offense is meant to elephants.
2,181 words
Author’s Note: This piece is offered for discussion. It was written for the 2012 US Presidential election. Many facts have changed for the better since then. Indeed, Right-wing populism is on rise. But the only edit I would make is to replace the phrase “(1) moral universalism and (2) anti-white racism” with “the idea that whites taking our own side in ethnic conflicts is simply immoral.”
Counter-Currents Publishing and the North American New Right do not take sides in elections, because no system candidates are on our side. Thus we do not endorse candidates, legislation, ballot initiatives, etc. We do not think of ourselves as citizens of the United States or Canada or any existing white regime. We think of ourselves as exiles from the White Republic to come.
Our aim is to create a new school of thought and social movement that will lay the metapolitical foundations of the White Republic — not to waste time participating in the existing system, which is rigged against us. The present system is not a vehicle that can take us to the White Republic. So we must emotionally and intellectually let it go, so we can focus on building a vehicle that can move us forward.
But it does advance our metapolitical goals to comment on contemporary politics in the United States and other white nations from a White Nationalist point of view. It is in that spirit that we offer our commentary on the 2012 US presidential election.
* * *
You can buy Greg Hood’s Waking Up From the American Dream here.
I have already argued that it would be better for White Nationalists for Barack Obama to win. Gregory Hood has also argued that it would be better for White Nationalists for Mitt Romney to lose. One of the benefits of a Romney defeat is that it will hasten the day when the Republican Party perishes as an institution, and the destruction of the Republican Party is a good thing for whites in America.
The outcome of the 2012 US presidential election is now in the hands of white working-class voters in the state of Ohio. This is ironic, since this constituency is disdained, exploited, and betrayed by both parties.
Mitt Romney, the candidate for Capital, regards them as uppity, ungrateful peasants whose unions must be broken and who must be replaced by cheaper, more grateful peasants from the Third World, either though immigration or shipping their jobs overseas. And Barack Obama, of course, regards them as just a bunch of Archie Bunkers.
Either party, of course, could have locked these voters in by now, if they had merely promised plausibly to represent white working class interests. Both parties, of course, have no problem promising to look after the interests of Jews, Wall Street, and the big corporations. The Democrats also have no problem promising free stuff to non-whites.
But when it comes to the white working and middle classes, it almost seems like both parties have a fit of conscience. It almost seems that they are hesitant even to lie to them about representing their interests. Instead, they promise nothing and simply try to scare voters into voting against the other party rather than for anything they stand for.
So it all comes down to whether white working class people in Ohio are more afraid of Mitt Romney of Bain Capital and Paul “Privatize It” Ryan — or that creepy mulatto/Muslim/socialist Barack Obama.
The Democratic Party is a coalition of a shrinking population of Jews, a ballooning population of other non-whites, and a shrinking population of alienated and deracinated white liberals. The Republican Party is the de facto party of the shrinking population of normal white Americans.
The Democrats are the party of net tax consumers, of the people who take more than they give. But the Democrats are more insidious than that, for they are also consuming the moral capital of America as well. The Republicans are the party of the people who produce more than they consume and maintain the nation’s moral capital (such as it is).
There is no question that if everybody who votes for Mitt Romney in today’s election dropped dead, America would be finished as a nation. You can’t have a working society when the parasites far outnumber the hosts. But if everybody who votes for Barack Obama dropped dead, most of my family would perish, but America would still survive. America without the Left would be somewhat more prosperous, and there would be far less crime, ugliness, and degeneracy. Unfortunately, it would also be a duller country, culturally-speaking; town and country alike would be befouled by development and pollution; there would also be more wars for Israel; but the country would at least exist.
The Democrats have no problem making explicit appeals to the identity and interests of their constituencies: Jews, non-whites, environmentalists, gays, feminists, etc. But Republicans refuse to make explicit appeals to the identity and interests of whites, even while they pander to Jews and other groups that overwhelmingly vote against them. Nor will Republicans take the necessary steps to preserve the white majority — stopping non-white immigration, addressing higher non-white birthrates — even under the guise of race-neutral programs.
But in a game in which the race or identity card trumps all, the party that refuses to play that card is doomed, and with it their constituency, white America, i.e., America. So why do Republicans persist in playing by rules that doom America and their party?
There are external and internal pressures that maintain this course. The main external pressure is the cultural hegemony of (1) moral universalism and (2) anti-white racism, which most Republicans refuse to challenge. But some Republicans realize that they cannot preserve their party or their nation without rejecting the current rules. This is where the internal pressures come in.
Republicans police their ranks to insure ideological conformity. To mollify the demographic concerns that might lead Republicans to challenge the current rules, they promote transparently dishonest talking points about replacing their shrinking white electorate with non-whites. Those who are not fooled are simply driven out.
To determine who maintains this suicidal ideological consensus and why, follow the money trail. Half the money raised by Republicans comes from Jews (75% for Democrats) and a large percentage of the rest comes from wealthy non-Jews (an even higher percentage for the Democrats).
Capitalist elites, however, do not care about nationalism. They profit from importing non-whites and shipping American jobs to non-white nations.
Jews, of course, care about nationalism: their own nationalism, not American nationalism, which is merely a tool to be used or discarded whenever it serves Jewish interests. As for America, Jews support the same policies as capitalists: easy entry, easy exit.
Both Jews and the plutocracy are threatened by American nationalism and seek to suppress it. Both groups are well aware that that present demographic trends doom the white race in North America and the Republican Party. But both groups do not care.
Indeed, since Jews are more aware than any people of the conditions that promote or prevent genocide, one has to conclude that their promotion of policies conducive to the destruction of the white race is no accident but rather their conscious preference and aim.
In fact, I am convinced that at the core of the Republican Party are people who actively wish to promote the destruction of the white race and the Republican Party. Why am I convinced that the Republicans are being subjected to a controlled demolition from the inside? Because if I were the enemy, that is exactly what I would do.
The enemy fears that the Republicans could, eventually, become desperate enough to actually try to represent and preserve the white majority. They know that if the Republicans simply followed the Sailer Strategy of explicitly appealing to white voters, they could maintain power and would set themselves on the path of actually preserving and enhancing the white majority.
Thus the enemy suppresses dissent and promotes the delusion that the Republicans will be saved by non-whites, knowing that they don’t have to keep up the act much longer, since demographic trends will finish off the Republican Party soon enough. Indeed, the Left is already gloating about it in public. It is now openly acknowledged that this is the last election in which the Republicans can hope to win without appealing explicitly to white racial interests.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s The Year America Died here.
That simply means that in the next election cycle, the controllers will redouble their efforts to keep the party on its downward course. Of course this means that they will also redouble their efforts to purge dissenters, and there will be more dissenters to purge as individual Republicans realize that they will have to break the party rules to hold onto their power and perks.
Like the Titanic, will the Republican Party go down in one piece or split in two, giving rise to a more racially populist party? Of course, we should be wary of the human jetsam of the Republican Party. Just because a politician is too “dirty” for the Republicans does not mean he is clean enough to represent white interests.
What do you do when you discover that your house is thoroughly riddled with termites? Do you strip the paint and plaster and try to replace each rotted board one at a time? Do you seek to tweeze out the vermin, hoping that you have gotten them all and that the colony will not flare up again? What happens when you discover that the termites managed to put their name on the deed and are evicting you?
Obviously, you just walk away and let them carry on their work of destruction while you build a new house with better materials, which you have termite-proofed from the start. But, in political terms, what would that mean?
Right-wing populism is the sweet spot in American politics, which is why the establishment fears, loathes, and co-opts it (when forced to). What would a pro-white Right-wing populism look like?
First and foremost, it would have to declare itself explicitly as a vehicle for promoting white interests, including working to preserve and enhance the white majority.
Second, although populism makes the common good the standard of justice, the rich and powerful have the whole system looking out for them, so a Right-wing populist movement would focus on protecting the interests of the white working and middle classes. It would be pro-private property, widely distributed, but against the concentration of wealth. It would promote the creation of small and medium-sized businesses to broaden the middle class. It would promote economic protectionism to restore American manufacturing jobs.
How would such a party be termite-proofed? Not only should it exclude Jews, plutocrats, and free market ideologues from the start, it should also promote policies that would send them packing.
For instance, why not propose radically egalitarian tax policies? Since the Federal government could go back to funding itself with tariffs, how about zero income or capital gains taxes on the first $1 million/year — and 100% confiscation of all income, including capital gains, above $1 million/year? But since we want to encourage artists and inventors who actually create new things (not performing artists), why not exempt them? Why not adopt a Social Credit economy and simply abolish usury? Why not run on a platform of complete debt repudiation?
But wouldn’t America’s richest people, 35% of them Jewish, just up stakes and leave the country? Wouldn’t they renounce their citizenship and move to places with less burdensome taxes? Yes, of course they would. But we want them to leave. We want anybody who can’t make ends meet on $1 million/year, and who is rootless enough to renounce his citizenship over money, to leave. We don’t want people like that having any say over our politics. If we are going to regain control over our destiny, they have to go.
But wouldn’t the economy collapse just like in Atlas Shugged? Yes and no. First of all, we want certain segments of the economy to collapse. No more banks. No more hedge funds. No more day traders, speculators, flippers, and the like. The goal of our system is to have a large, prosperous middle class secure against inflation and deflation, boom and bust, with socialized medicine, short work weeks, generous retirement benefits, “5 to 9” conservative policies, and a green, ecologically sustainable economy. Our people will have generous incomes, and if somebody wants to sell products to them, we don’t care where they live or what race they are, so long as the products are manufactured by our people, within our borders.
A Right-wing populist movement within the present system is not the same thing as White Nationalism. It might not be a suitable vehicle to bring about White Nationalism, although we are watching the Golden Dawn carefully. But such a movement would go a long way toward breaking up the current power structure, radicalizing and racializing the white population in the process. And that would definitely be good for White Nationalism.
The defeat of Mitt Romney will hasten the day that the Republican Party perishes and the White Republic emerges.
* * *
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
Conservatismus delenda est! Conservatives do not make revolutions, they are nothing but an obstacle to change. Most tragic of all, they are more effective at preventing change for the better than change for the worse, because, while they have no influence on the enemy, they fill our people’s heads with naive ideas and channel their activism into tactics that have proven sterile for decades and even centuries. Without them, the Left’s Overton Window would be impossible.
There are many good Republicans and even some good Democrats. Vote the individual, not the party. Most of the time, that will mean voting Republican, but not always. When there are no good candidates from the two official parties, then vote third-party. You might argue that voting doesn’t matter, but I think that goes too far. It won’t solve anything, but it might shock and upset the ruling class, as it did in 2016.
If they’re offering what you want, why vote at all? It’s reasonable for White to expect the same parties that pander to non-Whites to also pander to them unless the whole point of both parties is to be anti-White. Which, in my view, it is. The difference is that a large number of Whites who still have self-respect think the GOP is on their side. That’s why the GOP must die.
A ‘conservative’ orientation is essential for any White revolutionary. But it means understanding that ‘being conservative’ isn’t a political posture, it’s a disposition toward the making of political decisions. Our goal as White Identity Nationalists should be to preserve and enhance those things that make Whites happy and prosperous and forward-looking, while vigorously engaging in the most radical annihilation of anything that suppresses our people’s happiness, prosperity and vision.
Revolution and conservation are not opposites. In fact, ‘revolution’ just as much entails a return to origins and ‘conservation’ does.
There have been inventions like the German “Conservative Revolution” and the like, morally Traditional and socially Revolutionary, but the fact remains that you cannot be both Revolutionary and Conservative on the same issue, for the former implies change and the latter implies no change.
The failure of conservatism is evident from the fact that the Overton Window always moves to the Left, over the decades and centuries. This is for the simple reason that, while the Left implements change when in government, Conservatives only preserve the new status quo left by the Left whenever they return to power. And you can’t win by remaining permanently on the defensive. That’s why Conservative equals loser.
So, yes, being Conservative is not an ideology, it is a disposition, indeed! It’s the willingness to accept the status quo created by others.
That is why, nowadays (and the longer the Left is in power), there are fewer and fewer things worth conserving and more and more things that need to be changed radically. That’s why we need to become entirely Revolutionary and leave conservatism for others.
If I implied that one could have ‘revolutionary’ or ‘progressive’ or any other change-oriented political position and a conservative position on the same matter, then I was unclear. Obviously that is not the case. But in the interest of Whites, we must conserve what Whites love and reform or eliminate that which Whites do not.
There is plenty worth conserving. Just like there’s plenty to be ‘revolved’, restored. Just as there are plenty of things to progressed to a more desirable state for Whites.
The failures of anti-racist – anti-White – ‘conservatism’ need not be our failures. But to tell people who only have a few things left to cling to from the past that their White advocates do not care about those things is both politically unwise and betrays our core principle as pro-Whites.
‘Conservative’ Whites don’t want the ‘status quo’. They want to keep the things they love that they have not (yet) lost. This is their ‘conservatism’. But many also want to restore what has been lost, this is, I suppose, considered their ‘reactionism’ and is a demand for change.
Same people. Same overall impulses. Different political postures.
This is why most political labels are not the useful. We need to look at what our people want and give it to them.
White populism is is beholden to only one principle: Is it good for the Whites?
Sure, our morality should be defined by the question “is it good for Whites?” This question, however, focuses on an objective present and future (regardless of whether something has happened in the past or not).
The past is only good to learn from mistakes and historical experiences. But, as you implicitly state, there is hardly a time in the past when we believe that absolutely everything was as it should be and when the laws, for example, were worthy of being copied in their entirety.
Preserving the status quo is precisely what defines Conservatives. OK, if you mean, on the contrary, someone who wants to restore something past that is no longer part of the present, then we are talking about Ultraconservatives or just plain Reactionaries. These have always been a small minority compared to Conservatives.
Besides, the problem with Conservatives is that they have no will to fight beyond a weak defense of what already exists. And in that pusillanimous defense they always lie about their real motives. This includes the anti-racist Conservatives of today and the racist Conservatives of the past, who did not have the courage to explicitly defend Race. They preferred to say that they opposed busing or integration for economic or any other non-controversial reason, rather than the real one. And by doing this, they caused people to stop conceiving the Race as an important issue. It is because of Conservative sloppiness and cowardice that we have arrived at the current situation.
Even if it involves personal risk, there is no way to win without mentioning the most fundamental issue for us and naming those who are the main opponents of our program. And we can only achieve that with a revolutionary impetus and an attitude on the offensive.
The Fetterman race shows that the multi racial working class populist meme is just a meme, whites probably didn’t vote for Fetterman so much as just stay home instead of debase themselves and waste their time by having to choose between an exotic foreigner and a literal retard. There is a segment of republicucks who do fawn over muh based blacks but they are not as widespread as commonly thought, even if they are exceedingly obnoxious.
Donald Trump endorsed Mehmet Oz in this race – another bad choice. Once again, it shows that Trump is useless and incompetent. It’s long overdue for the GOP to dump Trump. He’s not much smarter than either Joe Biden or John Fetterman.
The GOP cannot be populist while the same time being slobbering whores for the Chamber of Commerce and the Jewish Ruling Class. It just can’t. ‘Multiracial working class’ is equivalent of putting a racing stripe on a Yugo thinking you can now when at Le Mans. It’s a hoax and fraud. It’s also an idea promulgated by ‘populist’ Jews. As long as Whites have not way to assert their unique interests within the ‘multiracial working class coalition’, that suits our ancient racial enemies fine.
‘Multiracial working class coalition’ is a delaying action. Nothing more.
For White people, Barack Obama was better than Mitt Romney in 2012. Although Obama was/is an open enemy of the White race, Romney is a committed race-traitor. That’s worse.
Moreover, Obama’s foreign policy was less belligerent and more reasonable. For example, his 2015 agreement with Iran benefitted the whole world, except for the Neocons. Romney was good only for the Neocons.
Both are open-borders globalists, but Romney is worse because he loves war too much – for other people, that is, not for himself.
There’s not much difference between Romney, Biden and Trump. All three are swindlers, traitors, war-lovers and tools of the globalists. Obama was/is better than that.
But Obama blew up seven counties and somehow was able to achieve the Nobel Peace prize.
How is it peaceable when you bomb seven countries and end up with a prize for political purposes?
Both parties are racist traitors that should be fully expelled for treason.
I agree that Obama did not deserve his Nobel Peace Prize. He is nowhere near good enough for that.
However, I think his foreign policy was less belligerent than almost anyone else in the US Congress or Senate. His 2015 treaty with Iran is one good example of this. He couldn’t get it ratified in the Senate, because most of them are extreme war-hawks.
Is Fetterman a Jew? The name sounds Judean to me. He also has a rather large face reminiscent of the Jew.
I also wonder if Fettertard was installed by the democrats as a weapon to intimidate anyone who dare defies, criticizes, or calls out the left for their mass destruction and degeneracy to western civilization as we know it.
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