Print this post Print this post

What is the American Nation?

John Singleton Copley, Portrait of Paul Revere, 1768

2,669 words

The following is part of a larger series of articles that was written for an audience of French “revolutionary nationalists” whose image of America is almost categorically negative. Its ostensible aim was to highlight the positive in the heritage we White Nationalists claim. But at a deeper level, it was also an effort to convince myself that America has not been a historical disaster for the white race. The negative interpretation opposed here can be found in the chapter “Anti-Europe” in my New Culture, New Right: Anti-Liberalism in Postmodern Europe.

In the United States, the closest thing to Europe’s “new revolutionary nationalism”—which designates liberalism’s cosmopolitan plutocracy as Europe’s chief enemy, resists the de-Europeanization of its capital, population, and territory, and identifies with a biocultural vision of Magna Europa rather than the 19th-century nation-state—is “White Nationalism.” Though a marginal force on the American political scene (theoretically deficient, fragmented into scores of tiny organizations, and with a greater presence in cyberspace than in the public sphere), it nevertheless wages the same fight as its European counterpart and, on the most decisive issue, race, is considerably more advanced. In this spirit, it takes its stand with the “Old America” that is the counter-part to Bush’s “Old Europe,” it considers its people part of Europe’s biosphere, and opposes not just the present Hebraicized administration in Washington, but the anti-White impetus of “the American century.”

Fundamental to White nationalism is the understanding that, historically, America was not a melting pot, but a settler nation: hence a European transplant. Its original settlers (all of whom were Protestant, but not exclusively Puritan or Calvinist) may have had an ambivalent attitude to the Europe they left behind, but they had no intention of shedding their European being for the sake of mixing with races and cultures unlike their own. Their identity as such was rooted in distinctly European life forms, which were opposed to those of the country’s aboriginals and to its imported Black slaves. Specifically, this identity was an Anglo-Protestant one adapted to the nativist environment of colonial America.

John Singleton Copley, The Stillwell Family

At the time of the revolution, 80 percent of the population was of Anglo-Protestant descent. Of the remaining 20 percent, most were Dutch, German, and Swedish, all of whom were Protestant and easily assimilated into the original core population. Only one percent of its people, mainly of French Canadian and Irish origin, was Catholic. The country’s institutions were accordingly reflective of the values and beliefs of its transplanted Anglo-Protestant settlers, just as the state’s republican ideology and the producerist ideology of its popular classes were in harmony with its specific ethnic disposition.

At the time of revolution, the country’s national identity was still an embryonic one. The loyalties of the revolutionary generation were more to the individual colonies that had become states, such as Virginia and Massachusetts, than to the federal republic established in 1789. But despite the absence of a strong state, informed by tradition and aristocracy, the American polity was not simply the cultureless, economic enterprise that certain Nouvelles Droitistes make it out to be and it was certainly not the “nation of nations,” “the first universal nation,” or “the proposition nation” that our virtualist-minded anti-White elites insist on.

Even in this early period there existed an American national identity, buttressed by several hundred years of history; and by the development of specifically American institutions based on instincts of racial superiority and self-reliance; by conflicts with the British crown, which caused its people to see itself as a transplanted nation of Anglo-Protestant descent (though one imbued with freedoms Englishmen had allegedly lost during the Norman Conquest); but above all by an ethnic or biocultural identity rooted in the North European, specifically British (that is, Celt, Norse, and Saxon) stocks of the country’s settlers.

John Singleton Copley, "Watson and the Shark," 1778

America, thus, may have lacked Europe’s ancient genealogy, cultural legacy, rooted, territorial sense, and distinct ethnic consciousness, but its people spoke a European language, practiced a European religion, had a history informed by European symbols and themes, represented a fusion of European racial stocks, and felt their North European identity to be the defining part of their individual and collective identity. Until quite recently, as Jared Taylor argues, “America was a self consciously European, majority-white nation.”

Accordingly, the Americanized Englishmen who declared their political independence in the late 18th century did not simultaneously declare their autonomy from Europe’s ethnoracial identity. The liberal ideals of the revolutionary generation, in any case, were soon superseded by a Romantic emphasis on the particularisms and “special inner characteristics” of its people—a Romanticism that betrayed the new republic’s rationalist or Enlightenment premises. To these Indian-fighters, slavers, borderland Celts, and Texas revolutionaries, whose physical proximity to non-Whites had a powerful effect in enhancing their racial identity, it was obvious that the world’s peoples lacked the innate capacity to share in “the free government, power, and prosperity of the United States.”

What Tocqueville called the “Anglo-Americans” had not the slightest intention of extending their liberties to Indians or Negroes, nor even to those White men whose (Catholic) religion and (Irish clannish) temperament seemed to disqualify them for republican government. America’s founding liberal principles were, in fact, little more than the ideological gloss of the country’s Anglo-Protestant life forms.

Despite the Calvinist conceit of believing itself “chosen,” America’s political principles had universal import only in the most vacuous theoretical sense. For example, the Puritan vision of America was less a call to world reform than an affirmation of its uniqueness and superiority. And though the principles of American republicanism have since been re-interpreted to justify the present de-Europeanization, this was neither the intention of the Founders nor that of the country’s settlers, for their republic was preeminently a Herrenvolk democracy — germane not to humanity, but to the “historical humanity” that was White America.

John Singleton Copley, Self-Portrait, 1780–1784

In this vein, the US Constitution, which contemporary liberals have re-interpreted for the sake of their multiracial utopia, defended the institution of slavery and posited that a Black’s worth was only 60 percent of a White. The first Congress (1790) voted that only Whites could be naturalized as citizens. And even after the Civil War, the granting of basic civil rights to former negro slaves, as Sam Francis points out, had “nothing to do with voting, holding political office, sitting on juries, intermarriage, getting a job or being promoted . . . which is what civil rights have come to mean today.”

White immigrants were assimilated into the founding stock only after they (or their children) shed the cultural-linguistic identities that separated them from native Whites. As late as the Kennedy Administration (1960), the nationally conscious Irish, the first immigrant group, were still not fully assimilated. The so-called “melting pot” (a 20th-century concept invented by a cosmopolitan “Englishmen,” Israel Zangwill) was similarly selective, accepting only White immigrants as possible Americans (though it did mistakenly think that Jews from European countries were European).

Moreover, this racially defined identity was the legacy of both the popular classes and the country’s ruling elites. For example, Thomas Jefferson, who in a fit of Enlightenment enthusiasm included the phase “all men are created equal” in the Declaration of Independence, never — not for a moment — thought of extending equal rights to Negroes; Abraham Lincoln, the two faced Whig pioneer of the liberal leviathan, wanted to repatriate Blacks back to Africa; and the great liberal crusader, Woodrow Wilson, was an ardent segregationist who thought his cherished “democracy” inappropriate to all but Whites. Until the postwar period, White Americans of virtually every class and denomination saw themselves not as an amalgam of humanity, but as an American nativist variant of Europe’s white Christian nations. The racial vision of America which White nationalists today defend against the anti-European regimes in Washington, London, and Tel Aviv was actually the prevailing vision for most Americans for most of their history.

John Singleton Copley, Portrait of Mrs. Joseph Barrell (Hannah Fitch), about 1771

The racially selective character of America’s republican, and especially egalitarian, rhetoric, was indisputably evident in the country’s enslavement of Negroes, its extermination and/or ethnic cleansing of the aboriginal population, its territorial expansion at the expense of mestizo Mexico, and its effort to prevent Chinese and Japanese immigration. Its racial identity was so deeply rooted in the emerging national consciousness that it imbued Anglo-Americans with the confidence to assimilate different White ethnicities.

In the latter half of the 19th century, as European immigration and intermarriage demoted the prevalence of the British elements and the reigning spirit of American Anglo-Saxonism diminished the immigrants’ attachment to their past, American identity gradually extended beyond its original Anglo-Protestant core to become a European-American Christian identity. Race as such remained primary, for only on the basis of the immigrants’ racial compatibility with Anglo-Americans were they able to assimilate. The later advent of Black nationalism, as Walker Connor argues, testifies to the fact that American nationalism has always been a White nationalism. By the same token, the state’s new-found multicultural ideology inadvertently acknowledges that the historical forms of American identity are incompatible with non-European races and cultures.

From the time of the revolution until the beginning of the Civil Rights revolution (1956), American nationality was articulated almost exclusively in terms of three mutually reinforcing influences: an Anglo-European racial identity, Protestantism, and republicanism. The latter, it needs stressing, owed less to 18th-century liberalism than to the character of Anglo American society, whose small proprietors and farmers defined themselves in terms of self-sufficiency, relative equality, and self-rule.

Though the corporate capitalism and New Class managerialism today stifling this self-sufficiency grew out of the country’s liberal postulates, this was only one (however consequential) of its manifestations, for Anglo Protestant culture also nurtured a conservative, traditionalist, and authoritarian dimension opposed to much of what presently passes for “Americanism,” (just as the feminist, homophile, and ethnomasochistic beliefs of today’s mainstream Protestant denominations would have shocked earlier generations of Protestants). The Reformation heresies that prompted America’s Low Church settlers to accept the Bible’s inerrancy and uphold a literal interpretation of scripture also compelled them to spurn the behavioral, moral, and social principles of a purely materialist society of individualist gratification. Though this type of Protestantism engendered (or expressed) that “spirit of independence, self-reliance, and freedom” which accompanied the rise of capitalism in Northern European and today encourages the cosmopolitan nihilism of the existing order, at the same time its original impetus rejected an indifferent, massifying capitalism destructive of community and morality. In this spirit, it upheld hierarchy, authority, and tradition, opposed modern feudalism (corporate capitalism) and its verso, mob democracy (Communism), privileged the centrality of family, community, and mutuality, and cultivated behaviors and social structures supportive of a communally responsible rather than an atomized individuality.

John Singleton Copley, "Boy with Squirrel" (Henry Pelham), 1765

In a conscious effort to re-engineer the character of the American people, the ruling Judeo-oligarchy has re-christened the republican component of traditional American identity the “American Creed” and made it the sole legitimate basis of American nationality — as if being an American were merely a matter of subscribing to a certain liberal beliefs. Divested of its racial-cultural grounding, and the political responsibilities it once entailed, the liberal, cosmopolitan, and globalist implications of this so-called creed is now used to legitimate the multiracial pluralism that presently assaults the nation’s European heritage. For at least the last two generations, the country’s elites have waged a merciless war on the ethnonational interests of America’s Whites, who are treated with “mingled scorn and apprehension” for hampering the country’s transformation into an economically efficient Brazil.

But if America for racial nationalists is preeminently a European country, it is — admittedly — “also something less than Europe. As a settler nation, America was founded and remains, to use Georges Dumézil’s term, a country of the “Third Function.” Lacking the warrior and priestly functions of its motherland and centered on the productive/reproductive activities of the lowest order, the American people traditionally immersed themselves in economic and mundane activities devoid of High Cultural possibility.

It would be exaggerated, though, to claim, as certain Europeans have, that this emphasis on economics (with its accompanying values of hard work, self reliance, and technical efficiency) made Americans somehow un-European. A middle-class country of the Third Function, America materialistically thrived in the technoeconomic realm. This may have left its culturally-impoverished society of self-made men something less than Europe — but hardly un-European.

While the country’s economic and materialist passions rendered its people vulnerable to the machinations of plutocrats and monopolists, bankers and corporate barons, and, above all, Jewish peddlers and illusionists, this, alas, has been the fate of White people worldwide. In America’s defense it should be emphasized that until the postwar era, when the state and the dominant institutions fell into the hands of corporate managers, social engineers, and alien interests, its popular history was very much a history of struggle against the great economic powers, as these powers endeavored to subordinate the nation to those systemic imperatives threatening the economic self-sufficiency and biocultural identity of its large middle class.

This is evident in the history of Jacksonian producerism, the nativism of the 1840s and ‘50s, the Confederate insurgency of the 1860s, the struggle against Chinese immigration in California in the 1870s, the populist revolt of Midwestern and Southern farmers in the 1880s and ‘90s, the bitter labor wars of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the rise of the Second Klan in the 1920s, Father Coughlin’s Social Justice movement in the 1930s, etc.

John Singleton Copley, Potrait of Colonel Fitch and His Sisters, 1800–1801

Though lacking an established church and an aristocracy (the First and Second Functions), even here the European racial spirit influenced the formation of the American nation. The yeoman farmers making up the ranks of the Minute Men who bloodied Britain’s imperial troops at Lexington and Concord, the gentlemen warriors like Nathanael Greene, Anthony Wayne, and George Washington who led the revolutionary armies, the Anglo-Celtic frontiersmen and colonists of the Texas Revolution who triumph over massively larger Mexican forces, the gallant Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson of the Confederacy, even George Patton of World War II fame, all these figures stand in the tradition of European arms and are tributes not just to America, but to the warrior spirit of their ancestral homeland.

Moreover, whatever High Culture Americans have known has been European. Disneyland may be the contemporary emblem of America’s Culture Industry, but its relationship to American life is as contrived as is Hollywood’s. The composers, philosophers, and great artists animating the higher reaches of American life have always been European. The few great men of literary stature they have produced— Edgar Allen Poe, T. S. Eliot, Ezra Pound, Henry James, Jack London, William Faulkner — belong to Europe’s Pantheon and are recognized as such. Only an intellectual sleight of hand can justify the argument that the American people are not an organic (however culturally hybrid) expression of Europe’s life-world.

Perhaps more to the point, the growth of the American republic ought to be seen as one of the great feats of modern history, for, from its origins as a small outpost on the outer edge of Western Civilization, it grew, in a remarkably short period, into a great power. Given the prominence of its Third Function, much of course was lost in this process, for America lacked the depths of its motherland, retained a weak grasp of history and tradition, and never developed a political class capable of sustaining its political ideals. Yet beyond the shallow, often philistine character this cultural paucity imparted to American life, the European settlement of North America represented an unprecedented manifestation of Nietzsche’s will to power — an untamed life force — that had transformed a vast wilderness into a flourishing extension of the European life world.

Against those transatlantic critics whose grand pronouncements are based on their familiarity with Los Angeles or New York (both of which have ceased to be American cities), it needs stressing that no White nationalist fails to honor Europe or to distinguish himself from its heirs. His opposition to the New Class, war-mongering, and Zionist hegemonism of the country’s deracinated elites stems, in fact, from his commitment to Europe’s biocultural heritage. This heritage, as such, informs virtually every significant facet of the country’s racial nationalism.

This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , , . Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

11 Comments

  1. B.B.
    Posted February 18, 2011 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

    Michael O’Meara said:
    the US Constitution, which contemporary liberals have re-interpreted for the sake of their multiracial utopia, defended the institution of slavery and posited that a Black’s worth was only 60 percent of a White.

    This is a common misrepresentation of the three-fifths clause. The central issue at that time was not the defining the worth of blacks relative to whites, but rather the apportionment of power between the North and the South in the House of Representatives.

    The South was already disproportionately powerful because of the two Senate seats assigned to each state regardless of population, and the North worried about undue Southern political influence if the South were allowed to count slaves for representational purposes.

    The North and the South compromised by counting each free person as one human being and each slave as three-fifths of a human being for purposes of House seat apportionment as well as for state tax contributions to the Federal Treasury. The provision applied only to slaves, not blacks in general. Free blacks, North as well as South were counted the same way as whites.

  2. Lucius
    Posted February 16, 2011 at 12:33 am | Permalink

    Ah yes, Israel Zangwill. The NSDAP had a lot to say about that British Jew who came to America and immediately interpreted Britannia’s former colony as the Jews’ “new playground.”

    Oh my, the damage they have done since that nation-wrecker arrived…it’s surreal. A Jewess was responsible for the engraving on the Statue of Liberty: a Freemasonic “gift” from the French Jews who bled Europe before they bled the U.S.

    Lucius

  3. Physis
    Posted February 15, 2011 at 1:53 pm | Permalink

    Dear Dr. O’ Meara,

    I haven’t bought your new book yet . I have the ”New Culture, New Right” and it is one of my favourite books of all time.
    I recently have viewed an documentary about ”Abraham Lincoln -Saint or Sinner” which again opened my eyes and although fully European by birth I have grown up on stories such as ”Ben and Me” stories of Davy Crockett & Alamo, General Custer, Paul Revere,and books of Mark Twain (to name a few), my opinion today is that USA isn’t interested at all in Europe, except in telling Europeans what to do with themselves. I did for example a few months ago suggest why instead of moniker ”White Nationalism” White Americans don’t use ”European Americans” as a possible surrogate and I got told off for even writing that.
    In my own opinion a white American born person, educated in USA (he or she) can be a fantastic researcher, clever, smart, knowing even better in some cases about certain disciplines and subjects about/from Europe and European history (USA is full of academics like that) but when it comes to naturally exhibit that ”natural European spirit” and mentality of European people, there is always a huge, massive difference. I totally understand that White American roots are of course European but Americans aren’t and can’t be European, they are American with their mentality /way of thinking /thought, behaviour, even physical outlook (and that is anyway what the above mentioned person who ”told me off” was pointing out – ”you can spot Americans…”).
    Americans may be visiting Europe as the ”Land of our ancestors” but unfortunately such visits in many (not all of course) cases are equal to visiting of a Zoo. It is almost like Europeans and their history, relics and monuments are like some Koalas or Siberian tiger.
    On the other hand there are white Americans who are as well totally ignorant of European geography and I am honestly sorry to write this here again, but that is a fact. I have heard it myself many times in person.What to speak then about friendships with Americans ? When I was arriving to live in Phillypeople from Europe who were living in USA previously told me: ”Americans are nice as they will cheer you when you come, be indifferent/apathetic when you are there with them and then again cheer you when you finally leave their country”. I did not believe that but it did happen.
    In some cases I had nice friendships with people and after some time they wouldn’t even write an email back. Later on I have discovered that paranoia and rumours had a lot to do with that but then my question is: where’s that famous American straightforwardness, honesty and ”in your face” attitude ? Some would believe rather rumours than ask a person directly or even worse, make the ultimate decision about friendship which is based only on inequitable/one side. I am not generalizing albeit that has been truly my experience.
    Thankfully I do have some really great American friends today who aren’t anything like above mentioned people.
    In above mentioned documentary I’ve seen group of people in the American South talking passionately in front of the camera about how for them Lincoln was like Milosevic in Europe and how they would like to secede from the rest of the USA.
    I salute what Dr. Johnson wrote above from the part ”America really…” albeit I firmly believe that it will take generations to make it happen (and I am sorry to write this : ”If ever”) and that a big, massive paradigm shift is needed in mentality of people to make a change. On top of that I hope that people will be more united in the future than disunited. No matter how internet is a good place for public debates or exchange of opinion still the best thing is to meet people in person, shake hands and exchange ideas and opinions.

  4. Posted February 15, 2011 at 6:08 am | Permalink

    For a nice contrast, I recommend the opening pages of Burroughs’ Letters, where he discusses how the Latin American tribes had “the luck” to be conquered by “the white trash of Europe” and hence largely escaped extermination and even preserved some of their own “culture.”

    Of current interest is how B. discusses this “culture” in quite positive terms, although today it reads like a Minuteman rant about them Mezzicans. B likes it because they leave him alone, unlike the meddling Puritans.

    However, the idea of importing millions of people from a culture where ‘no one is lower than a cop’ and everyone is subject to murderous, inexplicable fits [“Hee geeve mee the eeveel eye!”] does give one pause.

  5. Michael O'Meara
    Posted February 15, 2011 at 2:50 am | Permalink

    Greg,

    You are a fiend to re-post this ancient piece.

    It’s not badly written, but it’s a lie. It’s a lie I told myself in order to struggle for the white nation — that doesn’t actually exist — except in my fevered imagination.

    I fight for Ireland and for Europe. America remains — in my mind and in the arenas of world power — the anti-Europe, the anti-Ireland.

    Americans may prove me wrong, but I doubt it — if WN means anything.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted February 15, 2011 at 3:59 am | Permalink

      Mike, you are surely exaggerating. I know that this essay is but a step in a dialectic, not a final conclusion, and as such it has limits. But it is not a lie. America really is a child of Europe. America as such, of course, will never be saved. But the White Republic that we wish to create as its successor will be grafted on what remains European about the people and the culture of this continent, or it will not happen at all.

      • Lucius
        Posted February 16, 2011 at 11:29 am | Permalink

        Greg,

        With all due respect I must disagree. America is a former colony (“child”) of Anglo-Saxon Great Britain — an empire. Like all colonies it has and will always struggle for its own identity. It may never achieve such in fact, but your hope is admirable. Had Germany been America’s motherland, then things would have turned out much, much different — for the best in my humble op.

        Lucius

    • FWM
      Posted February 15, 2011 at 6:20 am | Permalink

      I’d pull your comment if I were you, for no other reason than book sales: Your book (which I own) is predicated upon the hope for the White Republic in North America. If one of our greatest wordsmiths honestly believes this is a lie, then half of the air just went out of my balloon, and we really are just crumbs on the floor awaiting the dogs.

      Thanks for the turd in my punch bowl, on Monday nonetheless, the beginning of the white slave work week.

      Mike

      • Michael O'Meara
        Posted February 15, 2011 at 3:45 pm | Permalink

        I continue to believe in the struggle for the White Republic. It’s the only thing that will save us from Americanism and the rising tide of mud. What I repudiate here are my former concessions to the Americanist superstitions that suppose we have been what we are not — a nation in the European sense. Where I ‘lie’ in the above piece is thus mainly in catering to these superstitions.

        In the coming struggles set off by the breakdown of the empire and the institutionalized Americanist system of nihilism (Egypt American-style), I think the American project will so discredit itself that I will no longer need to speak in half-truths. Americans, even middle-class, anglophile, conservative white nationalists, I’m hoping, will be more receptive to the abiding ‘truths’ of our Borean/Aryan/European origins — which are inevitably those of our destiny. The New America will be explicitly European, or it will not be.

        I stand by my ‘Toward the White Republic’ — it’s the positive affirmation of ‘Is America a Nation?’ that I reject.

        • Captainchaos
          Posted February 19, 2011 at 2:42 am | Permalink

          “I’m hoping, will be more receptive to the abiding ‘truths’ of our Borean/Aryan/European origins”

          It will be the increasing realization on the part of White individuals that any self-interest worthy of the name can only be pursued within the context of collective racial assertiveness that will be the prime motivator for most Whites to back WN; not a new found love of a literary idealization of our more laudable racial traits. However, once a critical mass is given to thinking racially, a space will be created into which a revivified European culture and idealism may flow which could potentially, if not decisively shape, and least significantly influence WN.

    • Fourmyle of Ceres
      Posted February 15, 2011 at 3:47 pm | Permalink

      In considered reply to Mike O’Meara:

      Sir:

      Your constructive criticism of an article you wrote when you – and I – were younger men, seems to miss the larger issue – that what you wrote is largely correct, and very useful for the caliber of analysis it displays.

      I have a bit more optimism than I used to, because I see things getting worse – worse, as in “lime” – but the foundation for the meritocratic aristocracy is being defined, although this Elect will not display their abilities before their time.

      You wrote:

      Greg,

      You are a fiend to re-post this ancient piece.

      Greg has answered that one, so I’ll answer the rest!

      Michael O’Meara wrote:

      It’s not badly written, but it’s a lie. It’s a lie I told myself in order to struggle for the white nation — that doesn’t actually exist — except in my fevered imagination.

      I fight for Ireland and for Europe. America remains — in my mind and in the arenas of world power — the anti-Europe, the anti-Ireland.

      In respectful reply, we all fight for the BEST of Ireland, and the BEST of Europe. Your excellent point regarding the warrior/priest – and Vladimir Putin seems to fit the bill perfectly in our day, and I can think of Another who did, less than a century ago – deserves the serious analysis it calls forth.

      Yet, you are pretty much the only person who linked this critically important Cultural element to the metapolitical project. This is a quality of analysis we desperately need.

      I can address this issue at greater length, but your final sentence inspires a more forthright reply.

      Michael O’Meara wrote:

      Americans may prove me wrong, but I doubt it — if WN means anything.

      In reply, let me return to my TA mindset, for a moment, and parse this very useful sentence.

      You wrote: “Americans may prove me wrong,…”

      In reply. the Old Americans – our immediate ancestors – proved you wrong, in part, by revising and extending the institutions of Europe. They also proved you right, by never addressing the vertical component of racial greatness, save in vague references to religion, and never asking what the proper function of grooming and developing the Aristocracy would be.

      Look at President Theodore Roosevelt.

      Between his family, and his efforts, he qualified. When he went to Harvard, if memory serves, you had to pass a series of examinations in Latin, and the history of Western Civilization. All who attended Harvard, at that time, had been groomed to rule nations.

      His vita remains impressive; the schooling and training he received allowed him to size up the situation at the end of the Russo-Japanese War, and have a peace treaty signed expeditiously.

      We have not seen this positive manifestation of the spiritual quality of “Will to Power” in the White House since, and more’s the pity.

      Now, consider the man who holds the Presidency today, a century later.

      I rest my case!

      Michael O’Meara wrote:
      …but I doubt it — if WN means anything.

      In reply, WN is only at the beginning of its political effectiveness, because the Internet has allowed to us overcome decades of conditioning that have made our current values pretty much an inversion of the values that manifested as part of our racial Call to Greatness, while using the same words.

      Cuckoo egg techniques – the same words, with vastly different meaning, and meanings that, IN PRACTICE, are all but inversions of their original meanings, with the mass propaganda system, color television, and mass indoctrinations system misnamed “education,” have made fools of us.

      You are familiar with things British. Channel 4 ran an amazing special by Derren Brown called “The Heist.” It demonstrated how easily people could be convinced, without force, by the power of suggestion – well-crafted suggestions repeated in many forms – to perform criminal acts they would never do in the absence of this continued suggestion, this very effective propaganda.

      After I saw this show, I spent most of a week simply writing notes to my self on how often I had been manipulated in this fashion, by these tools that are now in daily use by The Soft Totalitarians. I understood why Yuri Bezmenov was amazed at how easy it was to “demoralize” the American populace – a work that took 80 percent of the resources of the KGB.

      It was easy because the wall was rotted, yet our underlying strength was so great that the cultural residue took the full power of color television to force it aside. That done, the placement of the cuckoo’s egg – the adoption and worship of the inversion of the Cultural values that were essential in our race’s transformation to greatness – was easy.

      That The Children of the Sixties grew up hating America is one thing.

      That they did not outgrow it, and became the Managerial Elite of today, hating America all the more AND NOT KNOWING WHY, guarantees America as we know it, in this Cultural Moment, will fall, and fall hard.

      WN does not mean anything – YET – because every single “suggestion” from the media showed the symbology of WNism as being the symbols of Losers – ill-fitting sheets and pillow cases on their heads, mismatched, ununiform Brownshirt uniforms, green-toothed, gap-toothed, illiterate hillbillies, the list goes on, and the uniform message they send out is Incompetent Losers. A dangerous combination, I’m sure you will agree. Hell, in my estimation, they failed at being White, much less White Nationalists. (That’s why my metaphor of Charlie Brown ALWAYS “trying” to kick the football, and ALWAYS having it pulled away, is so apt.

      Charlie Brown has accepted the millions of media sugggestions, amplified by the public school system, that he is a “Loser.” He only has the comfort of the illusion of moral superiority, again, the result of millions of implanted suggestions that failure is noble, and forgiveness ever better.

      Somehow, some sort of circuit breaker kicks off in Charlie Brown’s mind that he should actually learn from the pattern of perfect failure. But it doesn’t, the very survival instinct, much less the Will to Power, has been replaced by the cuckoo egg of gracious impotence.

      That’s The Rule for WNists, with very few exceptions.

      The exceptions – Rockwell, Pierce, and a precious few others – are so much of an exception because they are exceptional people, in the first place. They are the true bearers of the Cultural Seed that makes White Nationalism a pale reflection of Western Nationalism.

      And THAT takes us to the metapolitical project.

      The metapolitical project seems to be transcending this ineptitude, replacing what White Nationalists were, with what they should have become – WESTERN Nationalists, the bearers of the flowering seed of Western Civilization, something that is done with the unique spiritual component (vertical component of Race) and DNA (horizontal component of Race) that separates we, who look to the stars, from they, who seek to dominate mud piles.

      What will replace what “WN means, (if) anything?”

      What it should have been, before the blinders were placed on those who came before us.

      A White Nationalism that is the further flowering of Western Nationalism, the manifestation of the Western Soul in the Cultural sphere of human organization.

      I believe the logical next step will manifest in the conceptual framework of Harold Covington’s Northwest Republic Analytical Model.

      Note a common theme of your critics, by the way.

      I ask them what they would DO! differently, if they had been in charge of The Order, if they had been Robert Mathews, or David Lane, if they had been Rockwell, if they had been Pierce, if they had power to form a new nation from scratch, if they could Create a Racial Homeland for our people, where none could make afraid.

      The overwhelming silence tells me they are so shocked by actually hearing a whisper of The Call To Greatness that they reject the red pill, and return to The Matrix.

      And that Call To Greatness is the common theme that underlies all of your work.

      That’s why you (and Harold Covington, and Greg Johnson) scare your detractors in the nominally WNist “Community.”

      You hold up a Freudian Mirror, and let them see themselves as other people see them.

      You let them see how they have allowed their Selves to be defined, and defined DOWN, by our implacable Racial Enemies.

      They look, and are so shocked, that they retreat.

      That’s fine, because those who can hear The Call, while few, are all that are needed to lead the organic foundation of the new nation, starting tonight, starting where they are, starting now.

      Devi wrote of those who heard The Call, and chose not to answer.

      I think a good part of the metapolitical project is giving them the rough outline of a framework for an Answer.

      My answer can be summed in one phrase:

      Honor, Discipline, and The Stars.”

      Take that as the foundation of my moral and intellectual legacy, and engrave it on my tombstone.

      The Work goes on.

      We can learn from this.

    Kindle Subscription
  • Our Titles

    Return of the Son of Trevor Lynch's CENSORED Guide to the Movies

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    The World in Flames

    Venus and Her Thugs

    Cynosura

    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics

    Rising

    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Forever and Ever

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles

    Reuben

    The Node

    A Sky Without Eagles

    The Way of Men

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Asatru: A Native European Spirituality

    The Lost Philosopher

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance