The Fundamentals

Fundamentals of a New Movement

The overarching, basic fundamentals of a New Movement are listed here. The link leads to the relevant post below. Also see "The Fundamentals" post list to the lower right. This is our new path. If you agree with this direction, then join with us.

The Old Movement is dead. Let us instead build something that works, a New Movement, a fresh start.

Sunday, September 1, 2019

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