The New Man

“Corneliu, make out of our country a country as beautiful as the sun, powerful and obedient to God.”

- Ion Mota

Readers of my work know that I have a long-standing interest in the Romanian Legionary Movement, its leader Codreanu, as well as prominent followers such as Ion Mota.  I have long understood that the Legionaries hit upon a core fundamental idea that escapes today’s activists – that there is something more important than ideologies, political programs, memes, and dogma. This fundamental idea is improving the human material upon which you will build your movement. Renewal of self, renewal of the moral capital of the individual, creation of The New Man, all of this is essential to ultimate victory. Trying to establish a movement on a foundation of human detritus will quickly lead to complete collapse, as we see today.

I have read the following interesting article:

Valentin Sandulescu - „Fascism and its Quest for the 'New Man:' The Case of the Romanian Legionary Movement,” Studia Hebraica, No. 4, (2004), pp. 349 - 361.

Let’s consider relevant excerpts from that article, and see how these can be interpreted in light of the current situation. In all cases, emphasis added.

An innovative development in fascist studies, based on the works of historians such as George L. Mosse, Stanley Payne and Roger Griffin, offers one of the most in-depth understandings of fascism as a political phenomenon of the twentieth century. This approach focuses on the revolutionary and positive programmatic claims of fascism. It asserts that fascism developed an ideology and not just a reactionary movement, and identifies the goals of that ideology with the revolutionary will for a complete regeneration aimed at creating a new order and a “new man.” 

This is the key to understanding what fascism really is.

It thus attempts to explain fascism’s success and makes it easier to distinguish it from other forms of authoritarian rule.

This is an important point I’ve stressed in my writing, contra to some Type Is, writing for alleged “metapolitical” blogs, who foolishly asserted (a la the Left) that any and all authoritarian rightist regimes and movements are “fascist.”  True fascism has a revolutionary palingenetic core.  Franco’s Spain was not “fascist.”

The aim of the Legion was to educate this “new man” – omul nou – the only one capable of building the new, regenerated Romania. 

Likewise, I am convinced that only a higher quality activist, The New Man of today, will be capable of achieving racial nationalist goals, through a new, regenerated Movement.

Not control over the means of production was important, but the ‘new man’ about whom all fascists talked. He was man made whole once more, aware of his archetype and of those with whom he shared it, and activist in that he was not afraid to join in a revolution which would make society correspond to the longings of his soul.

Well said.

One may consider that the creation of what fascists termed the “new man” was the final goal of their cultural revolution. This final, revolutionary and utopian goal was seen as a necessity, because it was presented as a cure for a deep state of societal crisis. Therefore, the fascist project was based on a palingenetic myth, the idea of the nation’s rebirth through the creation of a “new man.” Historians such as Roger Griffin see the palingenetic myth as the core myth of fascist ideology, and the driving force behind the movement. 

Indeed, The New Man should be at the absolute core of any palingenetic movement.  Without the correct human material, all endeavors will ultimately fail.

In this regard, taming the feelings of revolt manifested by the young generation since the end of the war, became a major goal for Codreanu. In his desire to avoid “classical” forms of political action, Codreanu envisaged a revolutionary platform for his movement, proposing a radical transformation of the country by reforming its human component.

First you reform the people, starting with the activists, then you use that human material to build a new society.  Today’s “movement” believes it can build a new society with human trash, and then “fix things” later on.  Delusion.

The first stage (1927 – 1933) was one of inner clarifications. Still indebted intellectually to their former mentor, A.C. Cuza, Codreanu and his followers were more preoccupied with the survival of their organization. Their main concern was not the doctrine of their group, but rather assuring a basic infrastructure for it to survive and grow. 

Yes, obviously a basic infrastructure is required, and the Legionaries started to accomplish this, with limited resources, in a short time. This contrasts to the “movement,” which believes that they can accomplish their goals with zero infrastructure, have no idea how to build such an infrastructure even if they decided they needed it, and who have squandered decades of time and millions of dollars.

The end of the year, however, brought one of the most difficult moments for the Legion. After being banned from the parliamentary elections in December, towards the end of the month a criminal squad of three legionnaires killed the acting Prime Minister, liberal I.G. Duca. Therefore, the Legion remained banned, along with its newspapers, and its leaders were tried as the moral perpetrators of the crime.

Does this sound familiar?  Today, foolish activists commit acts of violence, causing White nationalists to be banned, deplatformed, legally persecuted, and considered by the System and by the general society to be the “moral perpetrators” of these crimes.  How did the Legionaries respond?  Let's read on.

The beginning of the third stage in the Legion’s “quest for the new man” was marked by the criminal act of December 1933. Between 1934 and 1937, the Legion had no access to conventional means of political expression. However, this was the most fruitful stage for the development of the legionary project. The idea of building a “new country” through a “new type of man” was not a conventional one and did not need exclusively conventional methods to be put into practice.

This is what I advocate. I have suggested for today's "movement" a period of strategic withdrawal, a retrenchment, a rebuilding phase, a period of renewal - for racial activists to straighten out their acts, build real infrastructures, and become worthy, before putting themselves forth loudly and publicly.  This can be done right now, with limited resources.  It is an internal, not external, project.  It can be done "under the radar." Certainly, some subset of activists can get involved in electoral politics - at this time NOT directly associated with the “movement" - and, certainly, behind-the-scenes community building can take place.  But this is NOT the time for rallies, confrontations, and feckless “leaders” (grifters) making bombastic public proclamations.

After coming under severe public condemnation due to its violent and destructive actions, the Legion wanted to cast itself as a constructive movement. Thus, the rhetoric of the “new man” served the Legion very well.  

The similarities to today’s situation are obvious.

To this end, Codreanu published The nest’s leader booklet which served as a textbook that encoded the doctrinaire and organizational principles of the Legion. The strict, paramilitary organisation and cult rituals performed in the nest were part of the taming process, so eloquently described by George L. Mosse, as the key to fascism’s successes. 

I believe that the same could be successful today, helping to establish an esprit de corps. Yes, I know that the infantile Millennial crowd, with their snark, will ridicule that as “LARPING” and “old-fashioned WN 1.0.”  That’s coming from folks who have humiliated themselves since the 2016 election, who have wrecked racial nationalism, and have brought the “movement” to new lows.  Why should anyone listen to them?  What rituals do they perform?  Chugging gallons of milk and screaming about “Kek?”

What is even more important is that in this work, Codreanu drew the profile of the “new men,” an ideal construction to serve as model for the young legionaries. For him, the Legion’s regenerative project, what he called a “spiritual revolution,” could not be fulfilled by ordinary man but by new, “spiritualised” human beings

Hence, it is not sufficient to try to push through your political program, promote your ideology, with the degenerate filth passing themselves off as “activists.” You need the highest quality people to actualize your ideology into reality.  That is why the attitude of “you work with who is available” is so wrong-headed, so destructive, and why it has led to constant failure.

What you do is work to make available people of quality, rather than work with who is available.

The longing for a spiritual revolution was clearly stated by Codreanu: The new man or the renewed nation presupposes a great spiritual renewal, a great spiritual revolution of the whole people, a revolution that is opposed to the Spiritual direction of our day and an explicit offensive against this direction. Given the importance of the “new man” to the awaited revolution, Codreanu underscored the qualities that he should possess. The task of the “new man,” to solve the current crisis and guide the nation to a rebirth, asked for supreme qualities, qualities only available to super-humans, as other fascist movements implied. Therefore, Codreanu did not shy away from describing the “new man” as a modern hero, who had to show magnificent strengths in a plurality of fields…

Contrast this attitude of Codreanu with “you work with who is available.” The difference of viewpoint is so stark that there is no overlap whatsoever. Please note that the correct attitude was generated from those "no good" “Outer Hajnal” Romanians, while the obviously incorrect attitude derives from ethnies worshipped by the “movement.”

The nest is the basic organisational structure of the Legion, containing at least 3 people and no more than 13. The nest is led by a chief, conducts weekly meetings, and plays an educational role for future legionaries.

I believe the basic “nest” structure – essentially a cell structure – is sound. It is of a manageable size, breeds camaraderie, and, in theory, if compromised, the damage would not contaminate the organization as a whole.  I say in theory, because the System’s legal structures would attempt to hold the whole responsible for the actions of an isolated part. Here we see the need – the absolute requirement – for not only the highest quality of activists with iron discipline, and not only proper vetting to try to prevent infiltration (“are you Swedish” or “are you a film critic” does not constitute proper vetting, by the way), you also need a proper legal defense infrastructure and “friends” in the political apparatus.  All of which the “movement” doesn’t have, after decades of “activism" and after squandering millions of dollars of followers’ money.

The young legionary leader Mihail Stelescu…

Further comment about that individual is superfluous.

The legionary school had the mission to create a special “atmosphere” of moral cleanliness for the young legionaries who were destined to become the “new men” of tomorrow. After the young legionaries were educated in this school (the nests and the work camps) and became the awaited “new men,” their mission was to conquer the real world, and to serve as examples of what the Legion could do. To quote Codreanu: After the legionary has developed in this kind of atmosphere, in the Nest, the work camp, in the organization and the legionary family itself, he will be sent into the world: to live, in order to learn how to behave properly; to fight, in order to learn how to be brave and strong; to work, in order to learn the habit of working and the love of all those who labor; to suffer, in order to steel himself; to sacrifice, in order to get used to transcending his own person in the service of his people.

Now that is what should be done today.  Please once again note that these hora-dancing Romanians, so despised by the Amren crowd, had the correct idea of what to do, yet all our wonderfully superior big-brained "Inner Hajnal" heroes leading the American “movement” are so comically inept they couldn’t do more damage than if they were actively trying to do so.  Compare the behavior of the typical “movement” leader of today and the typical “movement” activist of today to what the Legionary movement was doing and the differences are crystal clear.

The image of the Legion as a spiritual school designing a “new man” was appealing for many young people, especially students. They joined the Legion with the genuine belief that they could be part of something historic. 

That is how you attract idealistic youth. Not with drunken podcasts, homosexual flirtation, obsessions over a cartoon frog, screams of “Kek,” and the constant call for “D’Nations.”

The legion is not only a school for intellectual education, in which man is taught to judge in a correct manner, by doing, it is not only a favorable environment for a development of political thought and the sense of tactics, but it is also a school for characters and for the moral rebirth of the Romanian people.

Character and moral rebirth – these are the essential ingredients sorely lacking in today’s “movement.”  Without them, victory is impossible. Without them, defeat is assured.  With them, victory is possible.

The “new man” remained an ideal only partially fulfilled, and the Legion ended in violence without putting its regenerative project into practice. Nevertheless, its impact on Romanian interwar political life was a salient one.

And it is even more salient today. If there is ONE single thing I would advise White racial activists to do today, it would be to emphasize, to focus on, character and moral rebirth, to focus on The New Man.  With that, anything is possible.  Without that, nothing is possible. Although ideology, science, intelligence, strategy, et al. are all crucially important, they take a back seat to character and moral integrity.  You cannot build a worldwide revolutionary movement on a foundation of quicksand; you cannot build a victorious movement on a foundation of freaks, grifters, phonies, frauds, the morally defective, perverts, liars, gaslighters, deranged fetishists, tin-foil-hat conspiracy theorists, individuals with all sorts of completely superfluous hang-ups and bizarre theories, weaklings, traitors, and all the rest. We have to remake ourselves before we try and remake the world.

See this.  Emphasis added:

"It is not enough to reassert the ideals of the students; a student conference cannot be reduced to a mere show of ideology; a conference must be an occasion to study the interior capacity of students to achieve their ends. It is pointless to talk of ideals if, at the same time, one does look to the means by which these ideals will be achieved. 

What is the capacity for sacrifice of the youth united at this conference? It is only by a fusion of the student's personal life with his ideal that the latter's achievement can be assured. 

The essential thing is the spirit of sacrifice. 

We all of us have the most formidable dynamite, the most advanced weapon of war, more powerful than tanks and machine guns: it is our own ashes! Every power in the world is destined to collapse, whilst it remains with the ashes of brave fighters, fallen for Justice and for God."   - Ion Mota

Rethinking Yockey and Horizontal Race

An informed horizontal race.

Previous discussion.  Excerpts:

Bolton actually supports my contention that Yockey’s opposition to “vertical race” was due to his concerns about intra-European division…Both biological (“vertical”) and spiritual (“horizontal”) race theory have validity and both should be complementary to the other.  One first restricts the ingroup to the biological race, broadly defined, and then within that looks for those people whose behavior and accomplishment exemplify the racial ideal…More broadly, if “Verticalism” implies a top to bottom (vertical) hierarchical ranking of groups based on superiority/inferiority, etc. then that is nonsense and rightly opposed (and criticized, for example, on a “materialist” basis in On Genetic Interests).

In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with horizontal race as a political concept, as a guiding principle for racial nationalist politics, as long as it is scientifically informed and scientifically literate.  Basing horizontal race on a rejection of scientific materialism is counter-productive nonsense, as is a Boasian rejection of racial heredity.  But we must remember that Yockey meant horizontal race as applying to Westerners – who he considered to be the Celtic, Germanic, and Latin peoples of Western (North and South) Europe.  We can extend that to include Eastern Europe as well; the point remains that Yockey did not mean to assert that Nigerians or Chinamen should be included as Westerners, with all racial differences flattened out in a horizontal race aspect. True, he used non-materialist language – “Culture Aliens” – to justify the exclusion of such peoples, but the practical end result is the same. 

On the broad scale, the scale of continental racial groups, Yockey’s horizontal race, practically applied, tracks well with EGI that is based on biological materialism. True enough, one cannot depend on pure instrumentality to ensure EGI.  After all, without a proper theoretical grounding, maladaptive paradigms can come into existence.  Thus, it is not enough to trust that future activists will interpret non-materialist horizontal race in the proper manner.  One must understand EGI, which is based on genetic kinship. The ability to constructively use horizontal race in the political sense, in a manner that stably preserves EGI, ironically absolutely requires an acceptance of, and understanding of, biological scientific materialism about race, contra Yockey.  But, again, assuming that EGI is “baked into the cake” of horizontal race concepts, there really isn’t a problem at the level of continental racial groups that crudely track along with civilizational/cultural divides.

Where things get a bit more problematic is when considering intra-European and intra-Western racial differences. Opponents of horizontal race would argue that at this level, acceptance of Yockey’s ideas means that all Europeans are fungible and differences between these will be erased. But if we include EGI – based on accurate measures of genetic kinship and not testing flim-flam that would tell us that James Watson is 16% Negro, that identical twins have different ancestral percentages, and that 13% of someone’s ancestral components can appear or disappear depending on the company doing the analysis – then this problem is obviated. This is the EGI Firewall I have previously discussed – an important topic.  Thus, we have an absolute requirement for at least some fundamental consideration of genetic interests, so that acceptance of horizontal race would by necessity include an acceptance of maintaining intra-European diversity, and the genetic interests that derives from this diversity and its constituent genetic differences. In this way, horizontal race can be safely utilized politically, without fear of damaging genetic interests.

All these caveats aside, we get back to the main point that there is value in Yockey’s basic idea about horizontal race, even if we reject the anti-scientific and anti-materialist mindset that informed much of Yockey’s thinking. In this manner the thinking of Yockey and Salter can be productively linked, to synergistically form a product greater than the sum of its parts.  Part of this synthesis is a rejection of the anti-materialist school of “spiritual race.”

But just as we oppose that anti-materialism, we should also oppose politically basing Principle and Identity on non-existent “racial purity” or to depend upon mendacious SJW frauds producing shifting ancestry data that are inaccurate, imprecise, non-reproducible, and based upon subjective choices of parental populations, algorithms, and nomenclature. I admit error; I myself was guilty of such dependence, and that was an example of bad judgment on my part.  Instead, the science underlying an informed horizontal race concept should be that of genetic kinship that can be calculated from raw genetic data.  All the other nonsense is a waste of time and is more or else politically irrelevant.  Ironically enough, extant commercially available ancestry testing may not be scientifically informed and scientifically literate either, given the errors, inconsistently, lack of statistical rigor and reproducibility,

Identity has a variety of components and Yockey’s horizontal race concept incorporates all of them, IF the concept is properly linked to genetic kinship and EGI.

I expect that there will be more discussion of this topic here and at my other blog.  This is fundamental for the formation of a scientifically-informed Yockeyian movement.

After the Deluge: A Post-National Future for the White Race

Assume the White Man has lost.  What next?

Introduction:  Hard times are upon us. The type of invasion of Europe predicted in The Camp of the Saints is occurring today, not in some distant future, and the pathologically altruistic response of weak, deracinated Europeans is exactly as outlined in that novel.  In Germany, the monstrous harridan Merkel is behaving as an inverted anti-Hitler, presiding over the genocide of her own people. In the UK, the sight of one dead Syrian child invokes an outpouring of compassionate action that hundreds of sexually molested English children in Rotherham failed to elicit. The navies of Italy and Greece are dedicated to saving the invaders instead of repelling them, to facilitating the invasion instead of stopping it. Mainstreaming nationalist Orban of Hungary makes bombastic statements, while migrants riot in the streets of Budapest, and as invaders make a mockery of his pathetically porous cheap chicken wire “razor fence.”  In France, mainstreaming heroine Marine Le Pen is more concerned with denouncing her own father than in standing as a new Joan of Arc against the invading hordes. Everywhere in Europe are the sights and sounds of surrender, of a people so fecklessly reckless (or is it recklessly feckless?) that they sacrifice their patrimony without the slightest hint of resistance whatsoever. In America, the System has long ago given up any pretense of guarding the border, and floods of illegal aliens join the unending stream of “legal” immigrants.  And the only leading Presidential candidate who says otherwise is an abrasive buffoon whose main concern is showing he does not wear a toupee, and who wants a “big fat open door for legal immigrants.”  Facts are facts: majority-White nation states are doomed if the present trends continue. What could come next?  What should come next?  What is the post-national future for a stateless White race that will not have any majority-White nations to call their own?  What to do?  How to survive?  Is there a contingency plan?

There are those who will not be happy with a discussion of such a scenario. The “hard-core” “SuperHitler1488” types, sitting in front of their computers, with a toothbrush moustache crudely hand drawn on their upper lips with black marker, will rail against this “defeatism” and will proudly proclaim their “willingness to fight” (after they watch the latest movie or football game); the concern trolls will tell us all we need to do is follow Amren-style mainstreaming for another quarter-century and all will be well; the “hate the messenger” sweaty obsessives will object to the message primarily because I am the one delivering it.

Nevertheless, this must be discussed. Contingency plans need to exist.  A race considered “superior” by some, with much commentary about “future time orientation” and “planning and discipline” – you would expect the nationalist leadership of such a race to be very seriously considering alternative future scenarios and how to strategically prepare for, and deal with, each. Perhaps such planning is occurring, somewhere hidden from the view of “small-fry” such as myself, who dares not intrude upon the majestic thoughts of the mighty titans striding across the racial nationalist landscape of today. If such planning is indeed taking place, I applaud the initiative and wish it all the best. The problem is that I really do not believe anything of the sort is taking place. The inept “quota queens” of the “movement” are, I’m sure, mired in their foolishness and fantasies, which is why, in fact, we are in the trouble that we face today.  Decades of complete uselessness does indeed incur a price on the inability of Whites to deal with the racial crisis.

Discussion: Therefore, imagine a scenario in which the USA is majority non-White, many of the major nations of Western Europe are majority non-White, other European nations are rapidly headed for similar status, Whites are a subaltern minority in what used to be their nations and homelands, a minority ruled by sneering aliens and step-and-fetchit White traitors. The grand dream of a White resistance to “turn the tide before it is too late” has failed to come to pass. The mainstreaming nationalists have failed to cash in on their groveling slithering toward the political center. The game is up and the White Man has lost. What then?

This is hard to answer without knowing the details of the situation. Are Whites still a plurality if not a majority?  Are all the non-White populations allied against the Whites?  Do law and custom still allow some degree of White resistance?  Are there any majority-White nations still in existence and what is their level of power and their commitment to a racial resistance?  These questions, and many others, need to be considered as possibilities. And, given how pathetically masochistic and delusional Whites are, we need to ask if, even at that late date, with the failures of multiculturalism on display for all to see, is there yet a significant fraction of Whites who “buy into” racial nationalism and finally realize the folly of pathological altruism?

Some may invoke the ethnocentric model of cohesive Jewish Diaspora group evolutionary strategies, as outlined in Kevin MacDonald’s works, as one possible model to follow for Whites who find themselves effectively equivalent to a stateless, diaspora people. There is much to say in favor of this, to an extent, although I note that the large amount of admixture which occurred with Jews at the beginning of their diaspora would be unacceptable for European preservationism, although the later stress on endogamy of course is exemplary.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I will suggest an approach based at least in part on Codreanu’s Legionary movement. One could envision a pan-European, trans-national movement, highly elite, comradely and collectivist in orientation, with an emphasis on productive action, creating a higher form of man, with a defined style of living.  In a sense, this legion would be analogous to some of the trans-national and pan-European crusading orders of the past as well as recreating the best aspects of Codreanu’s movement, adjusted for modern times (e.g., pan-European, rejecting universalist ethos, etc.). All of the differences between Codreanu’s movement and the failed racial nationalist “movement” of today (particularly the American variant) that I discussed in my book review (linked to above) would be relevant here: all the best of Codreanu’s movement would be embraced and all the flotsam and jetsam of contemporary racial and ethnic nationalism would be absolutely eschewed. Such a movement would provide the elite leadership to the stateless masses of the world-wide White minority, guiding Whites through the dangers inherent in their status as a people without any nation states of their own. Such a movement would help to bind Whites worldwide in a brotherhood of solidarity – while of course absolutely rejecting White traitors – and will draw a hard line against any miscegenation between ethnic Europeans and those newcomers who have invaded White lands. With this Legion at the head, Whites – or at least racially conscious Whites – would be bound to each other through ties of race and culture and of a shared history, as well as of shared problems and the shared sacrifices necessary for survival. While respecting and preserving the distinctiveness that exists between different European groups, and honoring the histories of the lost nations of Europe, this Legion and the masses it leads will absolutely reject the intra-European divisiveness that led the race and civilization to their sorry state (and the sorry state we are in right now, already, even before the final defeat).  Faced with existential threats to race and civilization, promotion of retrograde blood feuds among Europeans would be considered treason or madness, and treated as such (I would argue this should be applied today as well, and if it was, perhaps the scenario discussed here would not have to occur at all).  Just as Codreanu’s movement aimed at creating a new type of Romanian, the movement described here would aim at creation of a new type of European, a change in mind, a change in attitude, a change of spirit.  In the fires of defeat, a new type of White Man will be forged to deal with the dangers of new realities, realities created by behavior that would be, finally, recognized as defective and rejected. No more pathological altruism, no more surrender, no more universalist ethos, no more groveling to the world of color while fighting fellow Whites – no more stupidity and no more error. It will take a special kind of elite to do these things, and that is what is proposed here.

Now, of course, I believe we should be doing off of this this now, to prevent the fate of dispossession from occurring in the first place. Indeed, I believe we should do this even in the event of a total White racial victory, not only to prevent the racial crisis from ever happening again, but also simply because it is the right thing to do, especially after World Wars I and II.  In the end, this was the over-riding objective of the currently defunct Legion Europa project – a project which, in the last analysis, ran afoul of the “movement’s” affirmative action program. Thanks, “movement.”

An aside: I must say this to those who champion petty nationalism, who believe that narrow ethnic nationalism is the key to survival: now is as good as time as any to see your thesis demonstrated. Various European ethnies still have control of their nation states, they are still the majority, and in certain European nations, ethnic nationalist political parties exist. I suggest, I urge, I implore for these ethnic nationalists to use the power of narrow ethnic appeal to stop the invasion of Europe.  While that would not prove that ethnic nationalism is the way of the future, and would not prove it superior to racial nationalism, it would at least prove that ethnic nationalism has some utility, that is has sufficient power to at least temporarily arrest the demographic eclipse, the outright invasion, of the relevant narrow ethnies such nationalisms are concerned with. The time to do that is now. If you cannot even do that, if narrow petty nationalism cannot even motivate an ethny in the midst of an existential crisis, then what good does it have at all?

Summary: If and when Europeans become effectively stateless, when they loss control of all the institutions they have built, then the only thing they will be able to depend upon will be each other. The only thing that will ensure survival is each other. The only thing that can hold out the promise of taking back, or creating, nation states for themselves, is each other. It would be optimal to learn that lesson now, before the final Fall of the West, but if the only way to learn is through the bitter experience of total dispossession, so be it. If World Wars I and II were not sufficient lessons, and apparently they were not, more painful and humiliating lessons are just around the corner.

Conclusion: This essay is in no way meant as any sort of comprehensive analysis of this question; it is instead merely meant to “wake up” relevant individuals and groups to the necessity to ask the question and come up with some answers.  However, in the process of doing so, I outline, in very broad terms, one possible approach – the Legionary elite leadership approach - to consider as a possibility in dealing with a post-national White future.

After Fifty Years

To think  we've had nearly another fifty years of constant "movement" failure.

Revilo Oliver speech.  That was from 1969.  What excuse do you have, ye paladins and paragons of "movement" leadership?

Pan-Europeanism and the American Movement

Not there.

If anyone has any delusions that the old American "movement" has any genuine pan-Europeanism, this should be a helpful curative.

It does not exist.  It has never been tried.  One can not say whether or not pan-Europeanism is a viable meme for American racial nationalism because it has never been tried.  Every "movement" leader or thinker in the USA is or was a Nordicist of one type or another.

It's time for something new.

Identity and Genetic Interests

Creation of a disjunctive Identity out of non-disjunctive components.

In his book On Genetic Interests, Frank Salter criticizes National Socialism for, among other things, considering ethnies to be completely disjunctive categories, akin to species.  This contrasts to the modern scientific view of biological/genetic differences between ethnies being statistical; in other words, differences in degrees of genetic relatedness (kinship).  I agree with Salter’s assessment.  However, at the same time, I do believe that identities can be disjunctive, and of particular interest to this blog is the European Identity, which here is considered disjunctive and unique compared to the various non-European peoples (of course, narrower identities – such as “subracial” or ethnic – can be viewed as disjunctive as well, in like manner).

So, how is a disjunctive European Identity consistent with the view that human biological categories are not disjunctive?  After all, as NECists tell us, it’s possible that, for example, Greeks may be (slightly) more genetically similar to, say, Lebanese that to Northeast Europeans like Finns.  Now, that argument on its face is stupid, in the sense that, first, it is usually based on Fst and not genetic kinship, and, second, that it cherry picks the most extreme fringes of European genetic variation to directly compare with each other.  Greeks and Finns would be more genetically similar to the European genetic median than to the vast majority of non-European peoples.  But, for the sake of argument, let’s evaluate these considerations.

There is more to Identity than the biological/genetic, although, obviously the biological is fundamental.  Other important considerations of Identity are cultural/civilizational, as well as historical connections between groups; of course, one can think of other components of Identity as well.  Even if some assert that cultural and historical (and other) components are themselves not completely disjunctive categories, when all these components are taken together – as they exist together in the real world – then the synergistic interaction between them can become truly disjunctive.  These components of Identity intersect, and where they intersect, they form a point that is separate, unique, and disjunctive from other points formed from the intersection of components of Identity of other peoples.

One way of looking at this is as a Venn diagram.  Each component of European Identity can be represented as a circle.  For each individual component, there may be some degree of overlap with that of non-European peoples.  However, when taken together, all these circles representing the components of identity overlap, and where they overlap is a distinct and disjunctive area defining European identity.  While each individual component may exhibit some overlap with non-European groups, there is no non-European group that shares the biological + cultural + historical + other components of Identity together with European ethnies.

This principle is analogous to the issue of Lewontin’s Fallacy with respect to a genetic definition of race.  Taking alleles one at a time, one can make statements about “more variation within groups than between groups.”  However, when simultaneously considering a larger number of alleles, racial groups can be easily discerned.  Likewise, when simultaneously considering multiple components of Identity, a distinct and disjunctive European Identity can emerge (and as stated above, the same can hold for narrower – or broader – Identities as well, within reason; thus a German Identity exists even if there is some kinship overlap between some Germans and some non-Germans).

Another argument would be to assert “how is all of this compatible with your view, following Salter, that genetic interests are ultimate interests?”  Why not only consider the biological components of identity?  This misses the point about gross vs. net genetic interests which I have previously discussed.  The pursuit of genetic interests takes place in the real world, and considerations of all components of Identity influence how peoples can effectively defend their ultimate interests.

Thus, it can make sense for Greeks and Finns to be part of the same European Nationalist Federation, and it makes sense for these groups to embrace their European Identity, since by so doing they can more effectively defend their national territories and their genepools from alien peoples derived from other continents and other civilizational groupings.  It makes little sense for a Greek to say, “well I may be ever so slightly more similar to a Lebanese than to a Finn – ignoring that I may be closer to most Europeans than to Levantines – so I’ll just ignore my European Identity and either embrace the Third World Afro-Asiatic masses or go it alone, a tiny nation of several millions in a world of billions.”  Likewise, should Finns embrace Central Asians because of the possibility that they may be slightly more similar to some Ugric peoples than to some Greeks?  Should we dissolve the wall between “The West” and “The Rest” because of subfractional differences in relative Fst at the geographic and genetic fringes of Europe?  Greeks, Finns, and all other European peoples are best served by identifying with the civilizational grouping to which they belong and to which, by belonging, they leverage the collective strength of The West to defend ultimate interests.  Practically speaking, other European peoples do not pose any existential threat to any other European peoples, including the Greeks and the Finns.  But non-Europeans do pose such a threat, as the growing immigrant populations, derived from the Third World, in Greece and Finland and everywhere else in Europe, clearly show.  By identifying with the Europe to which they belong, all Europeans, including Greeks, Finns, or whoever, have much to gain and nothing to lose.  The organic solidarity of The West, the collective strength of the European family of nations, can serve to protect the ethnic genetic interests of each nation and people that constitute this collective.  An Identity of European and Western can give a people the biocultural rallying point to defend themselves from the colored hordes, from those whose civilizational Identity is hostile to Europe and The West.  Conversely, since European peoples pose no real existential threat to other, there is no loss, no negative for nurturing a European Identity.

Further, these slight genetic overlaps at the fringes of Europe would disappear if a European Imperium closes its doors to non-Europeans and non-European gene flow.  Over the generations, a genetic Fortress Europe would eliminate any possibility that a European group could be slightly more genetically similar to a non-European group compared to any other European group.  Over time, the “outlier groups” would increasingly converge toward the European median and diverge from non-Europeans.

Needless to say, these possible genetic overlaps are only a problem for those groups that have the potential overlap.  Ethnies more at the center, the median, of European genetics – say, Germans and French – are going to be genetically more similar to Finns and Greeks than they would be to non-European groups more genetically distant.   So, these more central groups have nothing to lose, and have genetic interests to gain, by a process where outlier groups converge toward the European genetic median.

This is all a “win-win” situation for all European peoples, worldwide.

Ruthless Intolerance

It's time to say "NO" to the defectives.

Identifying defectives is an important first step.  What's next?

Ironically, a key flaw in the racialist "movement" is an excess of tolerance.  Tolerance for defectives. Tolerance for Internet trolls.  Tolerance for agent provocateurs.  Tolerance for every type of stupidity and abnormality possible.  Some activists are so desperate for "followers," so desperate for someone who will (pretend to) agree with them, so eager for "members," so desperate for any illusory progress, that they will accept - nay, embrace! - all of the aforementioned defective and infiltrator types, and then wonder why progress comes to a halt and why the normal and productive become alienated.

Thus, the "vicious circle" begins: the defectives are embraced and populate the "movement," followed by an exodus of the positive and productive elements, reinforcing the defectiveness, alienating more of the normal and creating such an unattractive environment that most who join are themselves ranked among the defective.

It is - or should be - clear that the only way to break this negative cycle is a policy of ruthless intolerance toward defectives, toward trolls, toward backwards memes, toward all the nonsense that has been "business as usual" in the "movement" for decades.

Oh, yes, "movement" "leaders" play lip service to the idea of "eschew the defectives" but they never follow up on it.  They don't want to lose any of their precious "followers" or "members" - funny how a "movement" that values an "elite" and "quality over quantity" is so afraid to sacrifice numbers for progress - and they never want to take a stand on issues that may reduce the possible range of their support.  In fact, the same "leaders" who promote "elitism" and complain about defectives are often the same who tell us we need to accept "eccentric personalities" among the overt racialists, since we must accept that only the eccentric will populate the upper echelons of "open and public" racialist leadership.  Do they ever wonder why that is? Why after decades of racialist activism we've never built up the sort of socioeconomic support structures that would allow overt activists to resist social pricing?  Which would allow more of the non-eccentric to rise to leadership? Is it perhaps because of the decades-long acceptance of "eccentrics" who are unable to accomplish anything, and who dwell upon cephalic indices or Kali Yuga instead of the practical work of building a sustainable, long-term real Movement?

No, we should be less tolerant of eccentric behavior in our overt leaders, not more.  With the power and prestige (such as it is in the "movement") of leadership must come responsibility.  If one cannot restrain their "eccentric" behavior for the common good, what kind of leadership is that?

It is time to say "NO" to "movement" freakishness.  It is time for a ruthless intolerance for "movement" stupidity.  Enough is enough.  No more of the eccentrics.  No more about Kali Yuga, esoteric gnostic nonsense, narrow ethnoracial nitpicking.  Enough with those who promote juvenile cartoon histories of race and culture. We should stop tolerating those who use racial activism for a platform for their narrow obsessions - moon landing hoax, smoking doesn't cause cancer, animal rights, the USA has a carrying capacity of three billion people at a First World standard of living, Asiaphilic HBDism, Hindu spiritualism, extreme lowbrow vulgarism, comic book versions of history repeating the same predictable ethnoracial fantasies from "year one" - we need to say, finally, no. No. No more.  If some want to indulge in that, we need to separate ourselves from them - after all, isn't separatism a good thing? - and go our own way.  

What we need to do is take all the endless talk about elitism and quality and the problem with defectives and actualize it into strategy and policy.  We must have the sort of ruthless intolerance toward stupidity and failure that history shows us wins battles and wins wars.  If "movement" "leaders" cannot clean out the insane asylum - perhaps because they themselves are inmates - it's time to start over with something new. Something new in which intolerance toward the failure of the past is integrated from the start.

Step one is to say "NO" and break with the Past.  Then we can begin to shape the Future.

Identifying Defectives

Defectives : who are they?

Many in the "movement" play lip service to "excluding defectives" - but of course they never do it, giving said defectives pride of place within organizations, blogs, websites, comments threads, etc. One can define "defective" in such a way as to exclude even the worst "movement" misfits, and it is always "someone else" at "some other blog" or in "some other organization" who is the defective, never one of your own.

How then to effectively define "defective" in the context of racial nationalism?

A defective is someone whose ideas and/or behavior will repulse, alienate, and turn-off most White people independent of racial nationalism.

The last four words of the definition are crucially important.  We acknowledge that just being pro-White is itself often enough to repulse many Whites and is enough to have one be considered "defective" by the mainstream.  What I'm saying is let's eliminate that variable.  Let's look at the person above and beyond their racial nationalism.  Forget all about their pro-White activism.  Is there anything else - anything independent of pro-White attitudes - that would make the person truly defective?  That's the key.  If we are pro-White, then that's a given and whether or not pro-White attitudes are considered "defective" by the mainstream is irrelevant, since we still need to promote pro-White memes.  But that should not, and must not, be complicated by truly defective ideas and behaviors that have nothing directly to do with being pro-White.

Common Ancestors

Absolute Purity a Strawman

Read here.

The new scientific neo-racialist paradigm must be genetic kinship, not a mythical purity, an easily disproved strawman which can be used to discredit racial preservationism (e.g., "you are all admixed anyway, so why the concern?").

Some Tactical Points

Several more “tactical” points.

The ethnic/subracial “affirmative action” program in the “movement” – in which individuals are raised to positions of leadership based upon their membership in a favored ethny – needs to be replaced by a focus on merit, accomplishment and responsibility.  If a precinct of racialism asserts that its ingroup is “X” then any member of X should be able to rise or fall in power, influence, and authority based upon merit, or the lack thereof.  If such opportunity does not exist, this is evidence that this movement precinct does not represent ingroup X, but only represents that fraction of X from which favored individuals derive.  Hence, if any movement entity claims to be “Pan-European” then a person of any European ancestry should have equal opportunity for “upward mobility” and any person of like ancestry should equally be held to account for failure.  This has unfortunately not been the way things have been done in the “movement.”

It cannot be stressed enough that the knee-jerk, boringly predictable “movement” dogmas need to be replaced.  If an article is about, say, immigration, or a political crisis, in Spain or Italy, one can always depend on “movement” “activists” to chime in with superfluous and tiresomely predictable comments about “admixture,” “Moors” or what have you.  An article on Greece’s Golden Dawn will lead to similar comments and “observations” such as “the head of Golden Dawn doesn’t look very white to me.”  Something about Russia may lead to comments about Russia “not being Western” and about “Mongols” and “Asian admixture.”  Something about Ancient Rome?  The original Romans were “Nordic” and the Empire collapsed because of “racial mixing.” However, articles on, say, Iceland or Scandinavia will not lead to commentaries about why Bjork and Bromstad look half-Asian – that’s not part of the “movement” dogma, that’s instead “blasphemy.”  The “movement” has its very carefully crafted, rigid “talking points” from which we are never supposed to deviate.  When a point is reached in which even Ancient Egypt (of all things) is called a “Nordic Desert Empire” then this is a level of ludicrousness that can put even Afrocentrists to shame.  The Old Movement can continue to play in their fantasy sandbox if they wish, but the New Movement has to completely eschew such nonsense.

The same applies to “activists” who bring superfluous and tangential issues to their activism, tainting racialism with their stupidity.  For example: moon landing hoax, “smoking doesn’t increase the risk for cancer,” weird dietary advice, all sorts of conspiracy theories (e.g., space aliens, Federal Reserve, Illuminati, etc.) – even if these idea are true, what do they have to do with racialism?  And the fact that most of these ideas are utter nonsense – and is justifiably viewed as such by many on the right side of the bell curve – merely adds yet another self-inflicted wound to how racial nationalism is viewed, how it is perceived.  The fundamental tenets of racial nationalism themselves are considered “crazy” by many people – as we try to present our case to we need to complicate things by bringing up things that further raise the “crazy alarm?”

Misanthropy, personal freakishness, and flaws do nothing but taint activism with the personal failings of activists.  The same goes for poor judgment, an enduring failure of “movement” “leadership” and a particularly dangerous trait given the power and resources of our opponents.  We need thoughtful strategizing, shrewd tactics, and the proper caution, not the reckless stupidity, and the “if they say they agree with us, give them the keys to the kingdom” naïveté, that leads to infiltrators and agent provocateurs and online trolls doing their usual damage.  This ties in with the need for a merit-based leadership, rather than the “affirmative action” program which puts unqualified individuals into leadership positions because they, so to speak, “look the part.”

By its very nature, dissident positions attract marginal personalities.  However, there must be standards.  Allowing “the inmates to run the asylum” results in a negative spiral, in which quality people are repelled by “movement” freakishness, increasing the proportion of misfits, and further alienating potential recruits and disgusting what few good people remain.  On the other hand, an insistence on standards, on activist quality, on responsible and thoughtful leadership, on ostensible “normalcy” – without in any way compromising beliefs – will attract more good people and lead to positive reinforcement.  The higher the initial quality, the better people will be attracted, which will in turn maintain and raise the quality, attracting even more good people.  Again, no beliefs need to be compromised.  Radical, revolutionary, and dissident ideas can be coupled to the positive personal traits listed here; radicalism does not require marginal misfits.  It’s a matter of insisting on standards. 

Better support an inch wide and a mile deep, rather than the reverse.  Strong, narrow support can be expanded, slowly, and in depth, maintaining and expanding the strength of commitment.  Broad and shallow support will evaporate when a crisis hits.  Strong support on the other hand provides the firm foundation to withstand shocks.

It is crucially important that a solution be found to the problem of social pricing.  Having a high quality membership, that avoids embarrassing and compromising associations, is a start.  Investing resources in providing “professional” activists with the means for good standard-of-living support (financial, social, etc.) is a must.  Effective leadership is required.

The Fundamentals

Fundamentals of a New Movement

Pan-Europeanism as the major focus will replace other more narrow “isms” – be they national, ethnic, subracial, etc.  The narrower “isms” will not disappear; they can continue to exist, but at a lower level than the overarching pan-European unity.  The two fratricidal world wars of the 20^th century wrecked Europe, the West, and the White race, and those who continue to promote division even now, are, whether they know it or not, working for the enemy, working for the Death of Europe and for the destruction of the worldwide fraternity of the European Peoples.  Therefore, all those who preach division within the European family – be that division genetic, phenotype, cultural, historical, religious – are the enemies of European Man and enemies of the West and enemies of our Identity and our Future.

Genetic kinship will replace racial “purity.”  As per Salter, ultimate interests are genetic interests, and genetic interests are based upon genetic kinship.  Only genetic kinship is relevant for biopolitics.  This contrasts to the unscientific strawman of racial “purity” which is usually derived from some a priori comparison to a picked parental population.  Since all genetic differences, regardless of their derivation (e.g., “admixture” [real or an artifact], selective pressures, genetic drift, etc.) influence genetic kinship, measurement of such kinship is the most inclusive and definitive approach for understanding our ultimate interests.  We accept the European genepool for what it is now and strive to improve it in the future.  To use Yockey’s terminology in a new way, we completely replace outdated and unscientific “vertical” concerns with “purity/admixture” with “horizontal” concerns with genetic kinship and genetic interests.

Total biocultural Identity will replace narrower biological and cultural identities as the major focus of European Being.  The narrower identities will still exist, but as part of Identity, and the narrower identities will become increasingly aligned with that of Identity.  Biological and cultural classifications by themselves are not disjunctive, only total Identity is disjunctive. The ultimate solution to any discordance between Identity and biological identities is this: we will align our biological/genetic interests with Identity by closing the borders and stopping non-European gene flow into European territories.  Thus, over time the genetic boundaries between Europe and the Others will become ever larger and more distinct; the genetic commonalities between Europeans, compared to the Others, will become larger and more integrated.  The same applies to any potential cultural overlaps between The West and The Rest.  Examples of this possibility, as exemplified by the Levant and by China, are shown here.

Biopolitics will replace the old fraud of Right vs. Left.  We care not if any specific policy of ours, or our entire program, is deemed “rightist” or “leftist” or whatever outdated label. We are not conservatives, reactionaries, not in any way beholden to “right-wing” thought.  We are revolutionaries, striving to create a new order.

Futurism, not Traditionalism.  Unlike some of the more reckless statements in support of Futurism, we do not call for the abolition of museums, the disregarding of our past and the great deeds of our ancestors.  Past, Present, and Future are all linked.  However, we look to the Future, our real Golden Age is that which we will make in the Future, it is not some sort of delusional Traditionalist fantasy set in the Past.  We will not reject the deeds of our ancestors, but these are not the sum of our being, we do not settle for them – we must surpass them.  We remember the Past, but for the purpose of spurring us to achieve greater deeds in the Future. 

Rational realism and empiricism is for facts, values and objectives can be irrational.  Thus, we reject the old, timeworn, factually incorrect knee-jerk beliefs, memes, and paradigms that have defined the so-called “racialist movement,” particularly in America.  With respect to facts, history, knowledge – the age of “movement” dogma is over.  We reject the misanthropic freakishness and lies of the old movement.  With respect to facts, we depend on rationality, on realism, on empiricism – on real Science.  But these things cannot provide us with our values and our objectives – they are merely tools. Our values and objectives can be irrational as they spring forth from our vision of the reality we want to come into being.  But we cannot confuse what we want with what actually is – nor can we settle for what is instead of what we actually want.  What is – that is the current reality, which must be discerned with empiricism.  What we want is derived from our values, irrational as they may (or may not) be, and for these objectives, empiricism is only a tool, a means, not an end to itself.  As part of this, the fantasies of Traditionalism – which invents false facts – must be put aside in favor of empirical facts and the irrational objectives of an enlightened Futurism.

Preservationism plus eugenics replaces static preservationism.  We are not interested in preserving a racial stasis, which is biologically impossible in any case.  In contrast, we avoid genetically damaging mass changes, preserving the core of racial genetic essence.  We wish to promote eugenics to improve the stock and, also, allow for the creation of new stabilized blends of European stocks – while also at the same type preserving the original stocks – to increase the diversity of European Man. Ethnic genetic interests are compatible with (gradual) genetic change within the race, eschewing miscegenation, particularly when that change can enhance fitness, and when it is in magnitude no greater than the genetic changes that have always been part of human existence; for example; those due to selective pressures or random genetic drift.