Print this post Print this post

White Nationalists are Not “White Supremacists”

867 words

The charge that White Nationalists are “White Supremacists” has two aspects. First, there is the claim that whites think of ourselves as superior to other groups. Second, there is the idea that whites want to rule over other groups.

I do think that whites are superior to some groups in some ways. I am very proud of our people, and we have a great deal to be proud of. In the areas in which we excel, we have done a lot for the world. Our superior achievements in comparison to other races are why so many non-whites are flooding into white societies. There’s no need to mince words about that or apologize in any way.

It is easy to find ways in which we are superior to other groups. But you can also find ways in which we are inferior to other groups. I just don’t think this issue matters, however, because as Kevin MacDonald and Jared Taylor have pointed out, even if we were the sorriest lot of people on the planet and had accomplished almost nothing, it would still be natural, normal, and right for us to love our own and to be concerned with the future of our people. And it would still be politically expedient to demand our own sovereign homelands.

As for the idea of whites reigning over other people, I don’t want that. I am a nationalist. I believe in self-determination for all peoples. The people who are actually committed to whites ruling over other people are the civic nationalists of the Alt Light. People like Gavin McInnes, for instance, claim that they are civic nationalists and Western civilizational chauvinists. But they are not ethnic or racial nationalists. They have basically conceded multiracialism to the Left. It is a victory they are not even going to question, much less try to roll back.

Chauvinism is an attitude of superiority. A Western chauvinist believes that Western civilization is superior. What is Western civilization, though? Basically, it is white civilization. The Alt Light is thus committed to the idea of white civilizational superiority, which is the first form of supremacism. They try to evade this implication with a hat trick, of course, declaring that Western civilization is a universal civilization, but it’s not.

Western civilization is a product of white people. The people who are most comfortable in Western civilizations are white people. When Blacks, Asians, and other groups come to white countries, they want to change things to suit them better. The Western chauvinist must say “no.” Non-whites have to live by white standards, including white laws, which are of course enforced by the state. In effect, this means whites must rule over non-whites. This is white supremacism in the second sense.

Now I believe that if non-whites live in white societies, we damn well better impose our values on them, or they will create a society that we do not want to live in. We really need to reflect for a moment on the absurdity of the situation in which it is now “problematic” for white values to be “supreme” in white societies, which were created and sustained by white people and white values.

But we have to be honest about the fact that it is a form of oppression to impose white standards on non-white populations and demand that they “assimilate,” that they surrender their identities, that they go around wearing the equivalent of uncomfortable shoes or seasonally inappropriate clothes. Because a civilization should be as comfortable and as becoming as a well-tailored suit. And blacks don’t find white civilization comfortable. It is like demanding they wear shoes that are two sizes too small when we impose our standards of punctuality and time preferences, demand that they follow our age-of-consent laws, or foist the bourgeois nuclear family upon them. These things don’t come naturally to Africans. White standards like walking on the sidewalk, not down the middle of the street, are oppressive to blacks. Such standards are imposed by the hated “white supremacy” system. But if we don’t impose white standards upon them, we have chaos. We have great cities like Detroit transformed into wastelands.

There’s a line from William Blake, “One law for the lion and the ox is oppression.” Because lions and oxen are different beasts, to put them under one law forces them to live contrary to their natures. White supremacism would be like lion supremacism: demanding that the ox live by the code of the lion. But the ox doesn’t eat meat. He eats grass. Eating meat doesn’t come naturally to him. The true white supremacists are the civic nationalists, who would think they are doing the ox a favor by declaring meat the “universal” diet and force-feeding it to him.

White Nationalists are not white supremacists, because it is not our preference to rule over other groups. Although if forced to live under multicultural systems, we are going to take our own side and try to make sure that our values reign supreme, our preference is to go our separate ways. We want an amicable, no-fault racial divorce so we can live in the manners that most befit us in our own separate homelands.

 

If you enjoyed this piece, and wish to encourage more like it, give a tip through Paypal. You can earmark your tip directly to the author or translator, or you can put it in a general fund. (Be sure to specify which in the "Add special instructions to seller" box at Paypal.)
This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , , , , . Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

22 Comments

  1. Posted March 23, 2017 at 5:14 am | Permalink

    “I’d rather be known as a White Supremacist !!!”

    After the antics of so-called “White Nationalists” over the years since Waco I prefer to be known as a “White Supremacist.”

    I got into the [bowel] Movement after Waco through the Militia Movement back before the suburban whiggers and their ZOGbots got into the act of pretending to be “CONstitutional Militias” even though their precious CONstipation in Article 1 takes away the basis for militias formed at the township and county level to a federalized state-formed militia. The Founding Felons were quite aware that the Revolutionary War started with the Concord & Lexington “Minute-Men” and not the Royal Colony of Massachusetts and its governor. George the First or Fourth Washington didn’t want the Whiskey Rebels to do away with his CONstipational federal regime by not paying the whiskey taxes and forming a local militia to contest the matter.

    So the original militias of 1992 (after Ruby Ridge) to April 21, 1995 were less than a dozen or so people run by a military veteran of the Klan or CI variety. The suburban whiggers with their reluctance to admit to being a private army or bands of warlords wanted to pretend that they were CONstipational militias, even though they were not formed by their state governments or under federal laws up until a lot of them got sent to prison by their ZOGbot infiltraitors.

    There are three or four times as many of these little survivalist groups today. Most of them no longer call themselves militias. Lots of them are White Supremacists.

    Dual-Seedline Christian Identity holds that the 6th-Day Beasts of the Field have no souls. On the 7th Day YHWH rested and on the 8th Day YHWH made Adam – “He who Blushes” the First White Man of a new White Sub-race. Only Adamites descended from Noah/Shem/Abraham/Jacob-Israel have a Covenant or even souls. The Spawn of Satan jews are descended from Satan seducing Eve and she giving birth to Cain who killed his fraternal twin half-brother Abel, son of Adam. In fact the Willie Martin heterodoxy says that Satan incarnated as a nigger and Eve loved itz black-snake, said “What a peach!!!” and chowed down on it. So therefore even the blondest jew is like Corn Cobb – 5 to 15 percent nigger. When I tell this tail both jews and niggers get annoyed.

    So when you believe as religious dogma that all non-whites have no soul, are nothing but animals and jews are born evil – Would that not be “White Supremacy?”

    Being born and bred in Central South Dakota from Swedes both East River and West River, “racial federalism” meant that Indians/redskins belong on a reservation. Where they are not given access to the White Man’s guns or liquor lest they turn meaner. They can enjoy their preferred fare of skunk and dog boiled up in an iron caldron though. Sounds a lot like White Supremacy to me.

    I send Dylann Storm Roof Christmas and Birthday (April 3d) cards and postal money orders and tell him that I appreciate what he did. I used to correspond with David Lane through his wife Katja. I refused to become one of Lanes’ Woden-priests though. I suspect that they think I’m a White Supremacist.

    I remember this Bullwinkle cartoon in which this Southron Colonel kept on referring to the late unpleasantness as “The War Between the States” and took umbrage at it being called “The Civil War.” Up until the narrator said that the South looked like it was going to win the rematch. Then the Southron Colonel said, “In which case you can call it ‘The Civil War.’”

    So Doctor Greg, when the Mighty Evil Empire is broken apart like a rotten watermelon and the 20 or 30 million ex-whiggers left rise up and have not one or two or twenty racial ethno-states but Ten Thousand of them led by Ten Thousand Warlords, I bet that you too will say:

    “I’d rather be known as a White Supremacist !!!”

    Hail Victory!!!

    Pastor Martin Luther Dzerzhinsky Lindstedt
    Church of Jesus Christ Christian/Aryan Nations of Missouri
    Candidate for Mayor of Granby
    Director Ten Thousand Warlords Project
    http://christian-identity.net/forum

  2. Posted March 15, 2017 at 2:48 am | Permalink

    “One law for the lion and the ox is oppression.” Making a limp man run is the worst crime of all.

  3. witty tongue
    Posted March 10, 2017 at 9:59 pm | Permalink

    Reading Dr. Johnson’s article reminded me of Thomas Jefferson’s quote:

    Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people are to be free. Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them.

  4. Posted March 10, 2017 at 3:39 pm | Permalink

    Excellent. If only more people on the faux right would read this article.

  5. R_Moreland
    Posted March 8, 2017 at 2:23 am | Permalink

    Analyzed objectively, the liberal critique of White Supremacy is a form of psychological warfare. Its goal is to throw White advocates on the defensive by using the multiple lie technique. First they provide a mislabel (“White Supremacist”) and second they go on the assumption that being such is very, very bad.

    This puts the target in a bind. Instead of discussing the real topic (White Nationalism) you have to deal with a straw man. But you also have to go on the assumption that for White people to be supreme even in their own countries is an inherently bad thing. But why shouldn’t, say, Germans be supreme in Germany, or Hungarians in Hungary, and etc? Stipulated, the USA is a slightly different case, but the principle remains the same. Why is it a bad thing that American citizens be supreme in America as opposed to third world mass migrators?

    The technique is used very selectively. Anyone ever hear liberals critique the government of the new rainbow nation of South Africa for being Black Supremacist? Yet that government’s policies are precisely those of supremacy, with Whites increasingly subordinated via affirmative action, denigration of culture, farm attacks, and potential seizure of businesses and lands.

    Do we ever see liberals critique Muslims for being Islamic Supremacists? I don’t mean the “extremist terrorist Muslims,” just the run of the mill Islamic Republicans in, say, Iran or Iraq? When refugees from Muslim lands pour into Calais or Cologne, do liberals hold up banners saying No to Islamic Supremacy ? To the contrary, White people who show concern over the imposition of Sharia law in London or Dearborn (said law being a form of Islamic Supremacy) are immediately denounced as (horrors! ) Islamophobes.

    Some supremacies are more equal than other supremacies, comrade.

    Come to think of it, if “supremacy” is such an ungood thing, isn’t it wrong to have Liberal Supremacy? Why should universities, mainstream media, the bureaucracy and much of the chattering class go on the assumption that liberalism is the only acceptable orthodoxy? Why not in the interests of diversity require an equal number of Fascists to Marxists in these institutions? Let us see Stoddard and Evola on the reading lists alongside Boas and Marcuse such that no one school of thought is supreme!

    It comes down to recognizing “Supremacy” not as an attempt to determine the truth but rather a tactic to obfuscate the reality of White dispossession. Expose the contradictions, then regain the psychological initiative for White people.

  6. cecilhenry
    Posted March 7, 2017 at 9:17 pm | Permalink

    Just had this almost exact conversation with my Father. The willful blindness runs deep.

    But the light is starting to get in.

  7. Peter Quint
    Posted March 7, 2017 at 6:12 am | Permalink

    White Christians took white women off the pedestal, and replaced her with the black man.

  8. Ed LeBouthillier
    Posted March 7, 2017 at 5:13 am | Permalink

    White Nationalism is the radical idea that White people have human rights too: a right to nationality, a right to culture, a right to self-determination.

  9. Ookpik Waltz
    Posted March 6, 2017 at 10:37 pm | Permalink

    We want to be supreme over ourselves. For that we are hated.

  10. Spencer Quinn
    Posted March 6, 2017 at 5:19 pm | Permalink

    Gosh, Greg. How much more sense do we have to keep making before people realize that we are right? Great article.

    • Will Windsor
      Posted March 6, 2017 at 11:42 pm | Permalink

      if only people adhered to reason as much as they profess. In reality, the liberal order replaced the ideology of Christianity while keeping all of its religious workings. Logic has no place when your values are based on abstract morality and faith.

  11. Gwoobus Harmon
    Posted March 6, 2017 at 4:26 pm | Permalink

    I find one of the most glaring and practical forms of “white supremacy” to be from those who push the hardest for non-white immigration. They believe so much in the superiority of the Western cultural norms and legal traditions that they believe any and all people would WANT to participate in it.

    To the left, it seems like such a natural choice that they cannot envision groups refusing to assimilate or adopt Western practices after being exposed to Western lifestyles. They really believe that different races and cultures occupying the same physical space will naturally yield to Western (i.e. white) standards rather than perpetuating and expanding their own.

    Why would these non-whites find this society preferable?

    This simply never enters their mind as a possibility. It is a given in their mind that white standards are universalist and non-whites will jettison any of their ways not in harmony with white standards of behavior, if only given the opportunity to do so.

    This is complete and utter folly and it plays itself out daily in Europe, North America, and every other white outpost on Earth.

  12. Ted
    Posted March 6, 2017 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

    “…Asians, and other groups come to white countries, they want to change things to suit them better.”

    Indeed, and in more ways than one.

    “…as Kevin MacDonald and Jared Taylor have pointed out, even if we were the sorriest lot of people on the planet and had accomplished almost nothing…”

    Those who have Salter’s “On Genetic Interests” (and if you do not, please get a copy) need to check out section 4h, which outlines the irrelevance of a ranking of phenotypic traits or accomplishments as a pretext for the pursuit of group interests. Any group needs no other justification than the fact of their existence and their interests inherent in group continuity.

    My default: I label as dishonest, and dismiss, anyone who uses the term “White supremacist” to describe White nationalists, much less to describe Alt Liters and HBDers. Use of such language is meant to trigger the same moral posturing reflexes described by MacDonald in his northwest forum speech. Indeed, use of terms like “White supremacist” is an act of (anti-White) aggression and should be viewed as such.

  13. Leon
    Posted March 6, 2017 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

    Great essay. I agree completely, and I’ve been saying something similar for a while now. Mr. Johnson has hit the nail squarely on the head with this concise, persuasive piece. I’m sure this will come in handy for converting the blue-pilled and civic nationalist types.

  14. Colliton
    Posted March 6, 2017 at 11:31 am | Permalink

    I wonder how White CPAC attending “conservatives” answer the question: “What do you think or feel about becoming a minority in your own country?” Or: “What exactly do you seek to conserve?”

  15. Santoculto
    Posted March 6, 2017 at 10:27 am | Permalink

    I prefer benevolent and self-critical superiority than ”i believe in self-determinism of other people”.

    • Dov
      Posted March 6, 2017 at 11:25 am | Permalink

      I’m not sure how anyone could consider Whites in the 21st century – the equivalent of a suicidal man careening toward the edge of the cliff – as being objectively superior (overall) to those of other races.

      • Greg Johnson
        Posted March 6, 2017 at 12:05 pm | Permalink

        Like I said, superior in some ways, inferior in others.

  16. Walter
    Posted March 6, 2017 at 9:10 am | Permalink

    I agree with the line of argument in the article by GregJohnson:
    The desire to live according to one’s own precepts is not “supremacism”.
    The latter is just a cheap smear word to discredit white, and only white- desire for self-rule.
    I also find the desire to rule over others to be a sign of a lack of a psychological focus. Hence, the desire to expand an empire for the sake of dominion, as seen in some chauvinistic political models in the 19th and 20th century, is in my opinion a sign of weakness and lack of a valid political concept for the ruling class in such a particular country.

    North America has an especially good chance to create and maintain a self-sufficient and secure white homeland. The geographical boundaries did in the past and could in the future again guarantee such an autarchous nation. As regards Europe: The damage is extensive and the busy beavers of doom are still in the ascendency, so the future looks bleak there, even in case of a radical reorientation of European politics.

  17. Donald Thoresen
    Posted March 6, 2017 at 8:26 am | Permalink

    This is precisely the intellectual opening that can (and should) enable White Nationalists to utilize some of the very real values of “formal” post-colonial thought. Our racial interests are paramount, of course, for each of the reasons listed above and plenty more, but we are not the only people being turned into materialistic, soulless mush for the sake of the Judeo-capitalist global kleptocracy.
    Interested readers might want to check out one of my pieces in which I attempt to move our thinking in this direction:
    http://www.counter-currents.com/2016/02/white-nationalist-answers-to-postcolonialist-questions/

  18. Spring Heeled Jack
    Posted March 6, 2017 at 6:42 am | Permalink

    I think the problem is with their narratives, not ours. ‘They’, which is just about every other group besides Chinese and Japanese, regard White Males as universal oppressors. Whites are conquerers, subjugators – in other words, successful. The idea of whites being proud of their destinies and achievements is terrifying to them because they know whites are responsible for Western civilisation and all its amenities. What they want is for White Men (and I say men because so many white women share the false narrative) to step aside so that the formerly oppressed can claim all the goodies. They tell themselves whites took everything from the people whom they supposedly subjugated and some, like the blacks, even construct mythical grand civilisations in Africa to justify taking white achievements and claiming they were stolen from Africans.

  19. Dov
    Posted March 6, 2017 at 6:23 am | Permalink

    Interesting thesis. Interestingly, of course, for all the “demands” of the civic nationalists, what actually ends up happening is not an assimilation of non-White foreigners to White values, but a decay of host culture to average out with those of foreigners.* How long must we play the game of pretending that stern declarations on television that non-Whites “need to be assimilated” do anything to ameliorate the destruction (in the course of a generation or two, in the case of Muslims) of values built and solidified over millennia? It’s always safe for civic nationalists to joke around about low-hanging jeans, urban antics on subway cars, and wiggers; but when confronted with the reality that these are signs and symptoms of the pathologies of multiracialism, they clam up or start babbling about “racism.”

    *I remember one night when there was a TV playing in the background, and I heard a news anchor use the term “threw shade.” Apparently, this is now considered professional language for news anchors. The same goes for “I’m good” and “my bad.”

    Kindle Subscription
  • EXSURGO Apparel

    Our Titles

    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

    Tyr, Vol. 4

    Reuben

    The Node

    Axe

    Carl Schmitt Today

    A Sky Without Eagles

    The Way of Men

    Generation Identity

    Nietzsche's Coming God

    The Conservative

    The New Austerities

    Convergence of Catastrophes

    Demon

    Proofs of a Conspiracy

    Fascism viewed from the Right

    Notes on the Third Reich

    Morning Crafts

    New Culture, New Right

    The Fourth Political Theory

    Can Life Prevail?

    The Metaphysics of War

    Fighting for the Essence

    The Arctic Home in the Vedas

    Asatru: A Native European Spirituality

    The Shock of History

    The Prison Notes

    Sex and Deviance

    Standardbearers

    On the Brink of the Abyss

    Beyond Human Rights

    A Handbook of Traditional Living

    Why We Fight

    The Problem of Democracy

    Archeofuturism

    The Path of Cinnabar

    Tyr

    The Lost Philosopher

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Revolution from Above