The sustainability of nationalism

More from The Seneca Effect by Ugo Bardi.

Japan escaped the boom and bust cycles of many other pre-modern human civilizations and managed to create a stable and relatively prosperous society. Of course, that doesn’t mean that Edo Japan was Paradise on Earth. It was a tightly regulated society where individual freedom and individual rights were unknown concepts. Social inequality was also very pronounced and political power was concentrated in the hands of a small number of wealthy landlords.

Still, we can learn a lot from ancient Japan on how to create a society that doesn’t overexploit its resources and maintains the natural wealth of its territory. The Japanese interpretation of the concept of sustainability made it possible for them to develop a remarkably sophisticated society. The skills of the Japanese craftsmen are still legendary today, while Japan attained achievements in poetry and figurative art that are a cultural heritage of all humankind: from Hokusai’s prints to Basho’s sophisticated poetry. In comparison, it is truly heartbreaking to note how the cultural treasures that Ireland had produced during its long history were destroyed by the greed and the carelessness of the foreign rulers of Ireland.

So, how could the Japanese attain sustainability whereas Ireland couldn’t? It is, of course, a complex question, but I can list here the main factors that differentiated Japan and Ireland during the ninetieth century.

  1. Japan had a strong national government. Ireland was governed by a different country.
  2. Japan had a well-developed commercial system and a national currency. Ireland had neither.
  3. Japan was isolated, practicing no commerce with other countries. Ireland was integrated with the British worldwide commercial system.
  4. Japan is a country of steep mountain ranges and low coastline. Ireland is mainly flat, with high coastlines.

What can we reasonably conclude from this in light of the current situation? Among other things, this: the neo-liberal world order, which increasingly depends upon globalization, international migration, and multiculturalism, is unsustainable, unstable, and intrinsically fragile. Nationalism is the solution, which is why both progressivism and conservatism are irrelevant and the Alt-Right is inevitable over time.

Christian nationalism is the one and only way to preserve Western civilization, as well as the many fruits of the West such as science, human liberty, and inside plumbing. You may not wish to accept that reality for one reason or another, but your excuses and your alternatives are rapidly vanishing.

Evil globalist fights nationalism

George Soros is spending big to try to overturn Brexit:

Billionaire George Soros has handed £400,000 to a campaign fighting to stop Brexit, it was revealed today. The investment mogul is one of the biggest donors behind the Best For Britain group launched by Gina Miller.

The scale of the financial backing will raise alarm among Brexiteers, with fears running high that the process of leaving the EU could be watered down or even halted altogether.

Former Ukip leader Nigel Farage said people were starting to ‘wake up’ to the danger of the referendum vote being reversed.  Mr Soros previously said it was possible that the UK would apply to rejoin the European Union soon after Brexit.

Hungary has it right. Any organization that Soros funds or controls should be outlawed. These evil people are straight out of 1984, attempting to subvert the clearly expressed will of the people in the name of “democracy” and “the open society”.

I note that the Fake Right opposes Brexit and nationalism too. It’s just a coincidence, right?

Meanwhile, nationalism is rising again in Ireland.

Luke O’Connor applauded and cheered with gusto and occasionally leapt to his feet during speeches at the Irexit conference for those opposed to Ireland’s membership of the European Union. The 21-year-old Kilkenny student warmed to the praise lavished by former Ukip leader Nigel Farage on US president Donald Trump and the Brexit-like political earthquake he unleashed in 2016. O’Connor wore a Trump-campaign “Make America Great Again” red baseball cap to the Saturday conference at the RDS in Dublin.

“I honestly get a great reaction. I would wear it on nights out,” he told The Irish Times. “I am hoping something comes of this, if not a party that we can get candidates to run in the European elections, that we even have a voice.”

The DCU student was typical of most attendees at the event, organised by Hermann Kelly, spokesman for the Ukip-led Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy group in the EU Parliament. O’Connor is young, male and felt like his was a voice not heard in Irish politics or the media.

Their time will come. Their great-grandfathers fought to be free from Great Britain. They will fight and their children will be free of the European Union. I expect Irexit to take place within 10 years, assuming that the European Union hasn’t collapsed by then.

Ye cats….

Steve Sailer observes that the civic nationalists really are as dumb as they appear.

They Really Do Believe Emma Lazarus’s Poem Is “The Foundational Principle of Our Country”

Well, you certainly can’t claim that the country doesn’t deserve its fate. Especially the country that was founded in 1883. I don’t think you have to be pig-ignorant to be a civic nationalist, but it observably helps.

The collapse of the American nation

Selwyn Duke addresses the way in which the very concept of nation has been erased from American minds:

When hearing about invaders streaming across our border, often with a sense of entitlement, we should be filled with righteous anger motivating us to robustly defend the homeland. We’re not. Or not enough of us are. In fact, a good percentage of the country works against the common good, passionate about the wrong things and acting as traitors would. Too many of the rest are comfortably numb.

This is why invasion has been tolerated (and often encouraged), why we talk about amnesty for people who should be unceremoniously shipped south, and why there isn’t yet funding for a border wall despite a record Republican House majority.

The reason for this, sadly, is that we’re not a nation — properly understood. A nation is an extension of the tribe, which itself is an extension of the family; it’s defined by blood, faith, language and culture. For example, the Sioux Nation wasn’t a “country” or “state”; it was a very large family sharing the aforementioned elements.

This truth was once recognized and emphasized. It was mentioned among the Founding Fathers that we enjoyed the benefit of “consanguinity,” meaning, a relationship based on having the same remote ancestors. This became less of a reality after the waves of 19th-century immigration, yet emphasis was still placed on maintaining nationhood. For example, President Teddy Roosevelt said in 1907 that treating people with “equality” was not a given, but was “predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American.”

He went on to say, “Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all.” Now consider how many people will describe themselves as a/an _________-American or, worse still, will say “I’m _________” (fill in, Polish, Irish, Greek, Italian, etc.). They may not be bad people; they may mean well. But they’re unwittingly strengthening the all-too-prevalent internationalist mentality and are acting contrary to the cause of nationhood.

Nationhood was defended legislatively in 1921 with the Emergency Quota Act and in 1924 with the enactment of the National Origins Act, which used immigration quotas to maintain our country’s demographic balance. This is called “racist” today, even though some Europeans had greater quotas than other Europeans (and they’re the same race), but demographic upheaval is precisely how you destroy a nation. Ask the Tibetans, American Indians or the Ainu in Japan (if you can find any) about that.

It is the conflation of “state” with “nation”, combined with the “proposition nation” nonsense that was created to sell “the melting pot” that has resulted in this state. Only aggressive and fairly ruthless nationalism has any chance of saving the American nation now, and the more time that passes, the less likely it becomes.

It’s understandable why Americans embraced civic nationalism after the horrors of the Civil War. But that doesn’t change the fact that they were wrong to do so, and that it has had consequences that have destroyed the Union far more thoroughly than the Confederacy ever could.

The Fake Right exposed again

Even The Weekly Standard and The Nation have figured out that the Fake Right doesn’t actually have anything to do with genuine right-wing ideology:

Writer Donna Minkowitz describes a secret meeting organized by alt-right figure Richard Spencer that she crashed in mid-November at an organic winery in Maryland. Upon arrival, Minkowitz writes that she was surprised to find that the discussion centered not only on the usual brown-shirt Jew-hating you might expect from neo-Nazis, but also on what she says is a “new emphasis on economic issues” that she found “seductive.”

Why seductive? Because the white supremacists’ views on economic issues sound a lot like, well, like views espoused by the Nation and Democratic party progressives. In what could pass for Bernie Sanders campaign literature, she quotes Spencer saying “I support national health care” and railing against “the trillions spent in insane wars.” Minkowitz also quotes Spencer blasting the GOP tax plan as “stupid .  .  . Reaganite nostalgia” and supporting a universal basic income. Another speaker decried that everything is seemingly becoming “corporatized and capitalized.” Wait—is this a white supremacist conference or a New York Times editorial board meeting?

She quotes another speaker exclaiming that “2018 is going to be the year of leftists joining the white-nationalist movement!”

As I’ve pointed out before, “white nationalism” is not nationalism, it is actually anti-nationalist imperialism. And just like every other previous pan-ethnic attempt, from Hitler’s pan-Germanism to Nasser’s pan-Arabism and Henry Sylvester Williams’s pan-Africanism, Richard Spencer’s left-wing, imperial pan-Caucasianism will go absolutely nowhere and will continue to fail to appeal to nearly all white people.

Imperial pan-ethnicism is nothing new. Pan-Africanism has been around since 1900 and yet the various African nations and tribes remain entirely distinct. Pan-Arabism was a little more successful, as the United Arab Emirates is still around and the United Arab Republic of Iraq, Syria, and Egypt lasted three whole years from 1958 to 1961.

Nations persist for a reason. Multinational empires fall for the same reason. And the manifold evils of the European Union are just a few of the many reasons that imperial pan-ethnic empires always fail, usually sooner rather than later.

The Alt-Right is inevitable because the waves of history are now strongly trending towards nationalism. The Fake Right will be an empty shell within four years; the only reason it even survives now is because it is a useful bogeyman for the mainstream media in the mode of David Duke and the Westboro Baptist Church.

That’s because you’re not American

Sarah Silverman explains how she was shaken and scared by the sight of a young man flying an American flag.

I had a boyfriend many years ago, he was my first boyfriend who had his own house, and one day I went outside to see what he was doing, and he was hoisting an American flag up the flagpole in his front yard. And I instantly felt very weird. It didn’t make sense, but I felt this feeling of like, um, I felt scared – yeah, I felt scared. So I was like, ‘Uh, what are you doing?’ and he said, ‘Raising the flag,’ and I was like, ‘Why?’ and he’s like, ‘Um, because I love America?’ and I was like, ‘Right, right, of course.’ But inside I was shaken.

And then I calmly walked to my car and I got inside and I called my sister Susie to tell her what happened. Now, maybe you’re thinking, ‘What do you mean what happened? Nothing happened, your boyfriend put an American flag up at his own house.’ No, you’re totally right, I had no idea why I was freaking out. I just – I had this very visceral reaction and my sister, who knows shit because she’s a rabbi in Israel, explained to me, she was like, ‘Dude, nationalism is innately terrifying for Jews. Think about it: flags, marching, blind allegiance? These things tend to ring a bell for us.’ Right. Of course. Duh. It made sense.

I would be very interested to hear how those who genuinely believe that Jews are Americans to explain this reaction. Especially if they can do so without resorting to civic nationalist historical revisionism.

Then, for an encore, I’d like to hear how Japanese are true Englishmen and Dalits are true Brahmins.

What the civic nationalists and Israel uber alles crowd don’t seem to recognize is how fundamentally offensive, racist, and anti-American their false narrative is. In order for their revisionist myth to be true, there can be no genuine American nation. There can be no heritage America. There can be no American people and there can be no American history. Which, of course, is precisely why revising and destroying history has been one of the primary goals of the Fake Americans for more than 100 years.

“Ethno-nationalism” is a redundancy. There is no nationalism that is not ethnic and a more proper term for “civic nationalism” is “civic statism”. “Ethno-nationalism” is just anti-nationalist propaganda, and it is such an intrinsically false concept that it did not even exist before 1955.

Too little, too late

If former Catalan leader Carles Puigdemont had truly sought independence for Catalonia, he might have been taken more seriously. But this belated turning against the EU tends to underline both his current irrelevance as well as his earlier failure to understand the basic European political realities.

Deposed Catalan leader Carles Puigdemont has branded the EU a ‘club of decadent countries’ and said a British-style ‘Catexit’ might be the solution. The pro-independence politician attacked the organisation as outdated in an interview for Israeli TV after his failed attempts to get European backing for his cause from his hideaway in Brussels.

He claimed the EU was a ‘club of decadent and obsolescent countries controlled by a small few and closely linked to increasingly debatable economic interests.’

Arguing Catalonia should turn the tables on EU chiefs who have warned there would be in place in Europe for the region if it breaks away from the rest of Spain, he added ‘They’re constantly telling us we’re going to be left out of the European Union but the ones who should take that decision are the citizens of Catalonia. Lets see what the people of Catalonia say. Perhaps there are not many people who want to form part of this EU…so insensitive to the abuse of human rights, of the democratic right of a part of its territory only because a post-Franco right wants it to be that way.’

The leftist Puigdemont made the same mistake that many in the American Fake Right do. You cannot be both pro-nationalist and pan-European. Europe is not a race, Europe is not a people, and Europe is not a nation. It is a continent.

Pan-Europeanism is, like American civic nationalism, a form of Globalism Lite. No true nationalist can support either. And pan-Europeanism will not succeed any more than the repeated attempts at pan-Arabism or pan-Africanism has.

As I have previously stated on many occasions, the fundamental political divide is now nationalism vs globalism. And the latter comes in many flavors, more than a few of which are cloaked in false forms of fake nationalism.

Inexplicable inequality

It is hard, so hard, to discern a pattern here:

It’s hard to discern a pattern in the violence that has wracked the Swedish capital Stockholm for five nights. Rioting in the city’s suburbs has raised the national debate about immigration, unemployment and social inequality.

The cars attacked in the violence are not high-end – not the BMWs and Porsches you might expect to see torched by class warriors – but the vans which ordinary people need to go about their business. Schools, a station and a library have been attacked as well as a bank and a police station…. Many said there was a wider context of a growing gap between rich and poor in Sweden.

On OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) figures, Sweden has seen the biggest increase in inequality of any developed country over the past 25 years. Immigrants and their descendants tend to congregate in areas such as Husby, the neighbourhood west of Stockholm where the violence started on Sunday. About 80{23e931505c9998ea7789b03fa212186bf4d6af5391998e330e3a146ae78b2862} of the 11,000 residents are either first- or second-generation immigrants.

It is not any more the Sweden we all thought we knew.

What do you know. Another Magic Dirt fail. Apparently even Scandinavian socialist magic isn’t powerful enough to transform immigrants into Real Swedes Just Like All The Other Swedes Except For Their Darker Skin.

Identity always trumps ideology, regardless of whether that ideology is free market capitalism, American civic nationalism, or socialism.

Nations are people. Nations are genetic. Nations are tribes. Nations are neither propositions nor geography nor political constructs. FFS, before you embarrass yourself with ignorant objections, look up the etymology of the freaking word! Nationalism is literally genetic tribalism and nations are nothing more than genetic tribes with shared cultural, religious, and linguistic customs.

1250-1300; Middle English < Latin nātiōn- (stem of nātiō) birth, tribe, equivalent to nāt(us) (past participle of nāscī to be born) + -iōn- -ion

Mailvox: midwit history

It’s no secret that I am not a fan of midwits. These responses to my previous post on Fake Americans and their Fake History may help explain why. They are the walking, talking examples of Dunning-Kruger in action. When I talk about them being relative retards, this is exactly the sort of thing I’m describing. Be sure to note how JM actually thinks he is correcting me.

According to your theory Britain, Canada (until two decades ago or so), Australia and New Zealand should be the best examples of freedom loving people in a land where the rule of law exists, where the government is not massive and social and economic freedoms are respected, in other words, Switzerland or close to it since their populations are by far MUCH MORE ANGLO than whatever you find in the U.S., less “tainted” by Germans, Italians, French and so on. I think we can all safely agree and that ALL the countries mentioned and less free and their populations endure more oppressive governments (female idiocy to the max, PC quasi-dictatorship, socialist policies, end to the right to bear arms, etc etc.). The worst part is that peoples of those countries CLAIMED FOR, ELECTED, AND ENACTED their governments actions with glee, only a tiny minority resisted or tried to do so. 

That’s ridiculous. The “British brethren” of the British Empire were obviously a different subset of Anglo stock than the American settlers. Anglo-Saxon Protestant heritage is a necessary requirement of reliable community support for individual liberty and limited government, but it is not a sufficient one. Many Canadians are descended from British settlers who were loyal to the crown and were driven out. Australia is descended from criminal deportees; if you ever wondered why Sydney is a center of gay depravity, look up the crimes for which many of those criminals were deported.

As for the British themselves, they went through several hundred years of exporting and killing off their best and boldest. It should be no surprise that those who remain today are little more than island-dwelling dodo birds, blithely welcoming the newcomers who have already replaced them in their capital.

Anyone who thinks Switzerland is a bastion of individual liberty has never spent more than five minutes there. A friend of mine who worked in Zurich for five years collected various fines I would not have believed possible, including one for excess noise after 10 PM and another for turning on his fog lights when the amount of rain did not necessitate doing so. To put it his way, “imagine a homeowner’s association run by uptight German women.”

Whether you like it or not, your theory is full of holes and cannot explain why the peoples whose entrance you decry were allowed to enter en masse by the “virtuous protestant men of British stock” that inhabited the US back then, while the countries that should be shining examples of freedom due to their Protestant ethic (hahaha) and Anglo-saxon “pure” heritage sink ever so low. You don’t seem to realize that Irish and Italians were brought as low cost labor not out of a “duty bring white men of good character”. You don’t seem to realize that if anything, the mixture of European peoples in the U.S. might have slowed down the destruction of the liberties that many Americans take for granted etc.

This guy’s binary reasoning is so inept that he would similarly argue that my theory of NFL defense is full of holes and cannot explain how the Vikings were able to score on the Rams; obviously if the Vikings reached the end zone, then the Rams must have intended for them to do so.  And the idea that the addition of various peoples with no tradition of liberty or limited government somehow managed to slow down the destruction of now-vanished American liberties that their most illustrious members openly worked to destroy is simply too stupid to be mendacious.

Every generation has a faction arguing that relaxing the rules can’t possibly do any harm. The Founders were no exception; the fact that they were naive about immigration and failed to adequately protect their posterity from themselves does not change the fact that their original vision for the United States in no way approximated anything even remotely close to what we see today. The irony is that in JM’s arguing for American civic nationalism and the irrelevance of national origin, he is actually making a strong case for utterly ruthless ethnic cleansing, as evidently permitting even one otherwise unobjectionable exception is sufficient cause to give future civic nationalists grounds to destroy the nation.

Sertorius is similarly confused, but less obnoxious:

The Framers absolutely intended a British ethnostate, yet welcomed all white men of good character. Which was it? And since “intention” implies instrumentality, where exactly are the plans–even if they’re just jottings on a cocktail napkin–that will bring forth such a polity?

Both. First, they had a very different definition of “white” than we do today. Second, they only intended to allow enough whites of good character to permit them to fully assimilate through interbreeding. (Notice that they didn’t establish a reliable mechanism for policing “good character” either, therefore they must have intended to import criminals and Satanists, right?) Third, they had set up a structure in which the several States were supposed to be entirely sovereign. They felt that this arrangement would suffice to address any fundamental differences; what would it matter to Massachusetts or Virginia if Pennsylvania was adulterated by Germans? Of course, the Civil War proved them wrong only four-score-and-change years later.

The Founding Fathers didn’t intend a single British ethnostate, but rather, a number of distinct British ethnostates as well as a few mixed white ethnostates. If you recall, they were rather favorably influenced by the historical Greek city-states. This is exactly why citizens of the USA should be praying for a reasonably peaceful breakup and non-violent ethnic cleansing instead of desperately trying to preserve the unsalvageable.

The real problem the civic nationalists have with history is that it clearly spells out the horrors that are likely on the way for the West. They avert their eyes and offer silly, nonsensical arguments about the intentions of the Founders in order to dispel the fear that is quietly gnawing at their bellies. But it won’t work, and in any event, nothing they say, and nothing I write, is going to make any difference whatsoever. I have no doubt that back in 372 AD, there was a Roman living in the town of Marcianopolis who was looking on in disbelief as 200,000 desperate Visigoths were permitted to cross the Danube to protect them from the Huns. Because refugees.

What could he have done about that? What possible difference could his arguments and his opinion have made? I like to think that Roman was smart enough to leave Marcianopolis and go very far away before Fritigern rose up to pillage the Roman north and slaughter the Emperor Valens at Adrianople six years later.

Fake Americans, fake solutions

This article by an early Fake American conclusively proves the power of identity politics even as he attempts to “solve” the problem of them.

The beginnings of identity politics can be traced to 1973, the year the first volume of Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago—a book that demolished any pretense of communism’s moral authority—was published in the West. The ideological challenge of socialism was fading, its fighting spirit dwindling. This presented a challenge for the Left: how to carry on the fight against capitalism when its major ideological alternative was no longer viable?

No, the beginning of identity politics in the United States can be traced to the mass immigration of Italians and Irish back in the 1800s. But as students of Roman and Byzantine history know, mass immigration and the identity politics that follow from it long precede the existence of the United States.

In 2004, Harvard political scientist Samuel Huntington published Who Are We? Huntington examined the stunning immigration, both legal and illegal, from Mexico and argued that it was undermining longstanding notions of American national identity. America, Huntington said, has both a creed and a culture. The creed is formulated in the founding documents of our nation and in the speeches of Abraham Lincoln. The culture derives from the Anglo-Protestant settlers who first peopled North America. Huntington worried about a “hispanicization” of American culture. This book was controversial, to say the least. Nor was it without weaknesses. It is hard for this descendant of Irish and Italian immigrants to accept the notion that America’s culture is monolithically Anglo-Protestant.

Every single time. And why would it be hard for Mr. Continetti to accept a basic fact of American history? Because his name is Continetti. The amusing thing is that he would probably angrily deny my claim to be a true blue Italian despite the fact that by his own illogic, I am more genuinely Italian than he is. Those who deny identity politics while clinging to their own identities will inevitably descend into self-parody sooner or later.

Identity politics is a veneer over the class politics that truly defines our society, and education is the best prism through which to view class in America today. 

Ironic, that a self-styled conservative would turn to a Marxian analysis in order to deny the identity politics that give him feelbads. Conservatives really have become yesterday’s liberals. Identity politics is not a veneer. It is the inevitable consequence of rival identities. Note that in Singapore, the leadership began consciously managing identity politics and to characterize Singaporeans by citizenship rather than national identity because its population was only 75 percent Chinese, (13.7 Malay, 8.7 Indian, 2.6 various), a percentage they felt to be too low to support genuine nationalism.

To combat identity politics, we must emphasize an American nationalism based on both a commitment to the ideals of the American Founding and a shared love of our national history and culture—a history and culture of individual freedom and religious pluralism, resistant to centralized authority and ever expanding into new frontiers and new possibilities.

Who is this “we”, kemosabe? How is this fake nationalism going to survive when it is based on a commitment that no one has to actually make and a love that is never going to be measured or held accountable? Will those who refuse to commit or simply don’t possess the love be stripped of their paper nationality and expelled? If not, then this is just more high-minded Fake American blather meant to disguise the fact that while they are citizens of the same multinational imperial state, neither they nor their ancestors were ever truly Americans.

UPDATE: So much for propositional conservatism. He has to go back.

The GOP tax bill’s bringing out my inner socialist. The sex scandals are bringing out my inner feminist. Donald Trump and Roy Moore are bringing out my inner liberal. WHAT IS HAPPENING?