Plato and Aristotle from Raphael’s The School of Athens
261 words
JOIN US TODAY! Counter-Currents is celebrating its 13th birthday and launch our annual fundraiser this weekend. This weekend, a select group of Counter-Currents writers, donors, and friends will be gathering for a celebration.
Anyone in the world can join us this evening to participate in one of the highlights of the weekend: a debate between Greg Johnson and American Renaissance’s Gregory Hood on the topic: Imperialism or Ethnonationalism? Which way to victory?
So none of you miss this historic occasion, we are streaming the debate live TODAY Saturday, June 10th, on Odysee (here) and DLive (here) at 10AM Pacific, 1PM Eastern, 7PM Central European time.
Greg Johnson introduces the topic here:
One of the fundamental divisions in the White Nationalist movement is between ethnonationalists and imperialists. Ethnonationalists want a world in which every distinct people has the right to a sovereign homeland. Imperialists want a single white racial state. Wilmot Robertson makes the case for ethnonationalism in his book The Ethnostate, whereas Francis Parker Yockey presents the case for imperialism in Imperium. Other advocates of imperialism include Sir Oswald Mosley, Jean Thiriart, and Guillaume Faye.
Read Greg Johnson’s defense of the Ethnonationalist position here: “Against Imperialism.”
Read Gregory Hood’s fresh statement on the Imperialist position here: “The Challenge Ahead” “What I want is a united Western Civilization-State that will ensure the physical survival of our race.”
Everyone can participate in the live chat. Send a superchat to ask a question to our participants! This is going to be a lively, interactive event, and we want to hear from all of you!
5 comments
When it comes to whites in Europe, I can understand there being more of an ethnic component behind it (England for the English, Poland for the Poles, Norway for the Norwegians, etc) and less of a Pan-European component — as these are ancestral homelands were are speaking of. This is not to say that a slim number of Hungarians don’t live in England, and they’d have to learn the English language and whatnot, but by and large, whites in European Nations will be different than the rest of the West, and that’s ok.
Whites in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand — it’s definitely more of a Pan-European model: the emphasis more on being White, and less to do with the ethnic background. Whites in these nations speak English across the board, share similar opinions on Government, culture, religion, and morals, and usually only celebrate the ethnic part of their Whiteness in their homes (food, music, holidays, etc). This is also ok.
This is also not to imply that all white Europeans assimilated equally well into the American way (The Irish and the Italians were not the Best immigrants) and the 1924 Immigration Act understood this, but there’s no debate that the least good Irish immigrant was still lightyears ahead of a Haitian, Vietnamese, or Guatemalan immigrant (legal or not) and that’s when the racial complement comes in, indifferent to the ethnic component.
Canada, USA, Australia, NZ were created, were built from inception as European outposts, European homelands.
That’s a nice idea but, not really true. All were outposts of Empire, British or French with demographics to match. I am aware of explicit European-only immigration policies for the USA and Australia, in both cases just after the inception of the nation.
The USA was very largely English and Scots, some Germans and French, until the early to mid-nineteenth century. Canada was mostly French until after the Revolutionary War and then became progressively British until after the second war. Australia was majority British with a large Irish minority and hardly anyone else, bar a few Greeks, Germans and Italians, until mid-twentieth century. New Zealand was very largely British ( and Maori ) until the second half of the twentieth century.
In Australia, at least until the 1970s, there was a strong drive to assimilate for all migrants. Standing out was not tolerated but was the subject of shame and ridicule. Even the odd Chinese was assimilated in this fashion. It sounds terribly uneducated and unfair to modern ears but that’s how a culture is enforced. Those people of fifty years ago never would have put up with the Pride Flag or taking the knee for BLM.
It is with certainty that the Europeans who explored, settled, worked, bled, died, & carved out a civilization out of the wilderness they found was NOT to become a minority. It is in this context that Canada, USA, Australia, NZ r European homelands.
I was under the impression that ethno-nationalism vs imperialism was an even broader dichotomy involving nonwhites. I’ve heard people like Richard Spencer argue that we can’t just cede land and these people need to be ruled over anyway. So that’s why I assumed ‘imperialism’ in this context was. Who in their right mind would want that at this point? Who would want to erase the rest of the European languages? We need as many obstacles to uniformity as possible.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber 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.