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.”
To read this, get behind our Paywall
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.
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.