Print this post Print this post

Tribal Praxis vs. National Praxis

1,606 words

How does the Western diaspora become the Western diaspora? What does it mean to build a tribal network? What is all this Fifth Political Theory (5PT) stuff supposed to be in practice? 

Offering the prescription is one matter, but filling it is another entirely. 5PT is about  studying, formulating, and applying this concept of the diaspora tribe in response to the challenges faced by European and Eurocolonial peoples. This will be a work in progress, permanently. There is no endgame to existence other than non-existence, which it ought to go without saying is something we would like to avoid.

Among identitarian and nationalist movements, especially in the United States, one of the foremost difficulties in developing the real-world institutions that would cement tribal identity and formation is the high degree of geographic dispersal. Too few people live too far away to interact regularly enough to constitute a “real” community, complete with all the social, economic, cultural, and spiritual benefits that arise from proximity and cooperation.

If everyone in our society is already “bowling alone,” why should we assume the situation is any different for those who believe in the perpetuity of their kind? The anomic problem cannot be solved with the ballot or the bullet. Nor can it be solved over a few beers.

There is too much focus on metapolitics (changing ideas) and politics (changing governments) and not nearly enough on changing one’s social environment to produce the outcomes sought. There are debates and “purity spirals” over orthodoxy, but a quiet indifference to orthopraxy. Being able to convince people to take an interest in your political program is all and well, but being unable to even produce a single geographic constituency at any level that would support it is a fatal flaw.

Now, 5PT dismisses nationalism as the vehicle of salvation for Europeans and Eurocolonials. Our agenda is not to create districts that would “vote nationalist,” but to create a network of diaspora communities which remain connected to one another through changes in our political environment. A nation-state, while perhaps desirable given a range of options between it and the status quo, is not made any more plausible by one’s ability to argue for it or theorize its utility and qualities. Europeans and Eurocolonials who want to perpetuate themselves into future generations form a very minuscule sub-national and trans-national demographic spread across dozens of countries, whose governments promote de-nationalized multiculturalism with the support of the demos. We can call this neo-liberalism, mangerial statism, cosmopolitanism, or any number of labels which partially describe it but fail to capture its totality—but the political (and metapolitical!) reality is that this system of memes has mostly eradicated the robust forms of ethnic nationalism and in time will likely trounce civic nationalism as well.

A handful of rural counties or lone city councilmen or minority parties are not going to revolutionize the politics of the entrenched demo-bureaucratic system. More likely would be the latter’s retaliation against them and the destruction of all their efforts with a few swift executive actions and unanimous legislative decisions.

That being said, even if 5PTs rejects political nationalism as a viable option, it recognizes that those initially drawn to it have the most potential for integration into a diaspora tribe. So now what? Here we must draw a distinction between national praxis, which hardly exists, and tribal praxis, which 5PT wants to create with or without the state.

The standard argument for nationalism—and its core component of self-determination for recognized peoples with defined territories—is that it provides a space for the flourishing of a politically united people (typically on the basis of shared historical and ethnic ties) where they are unmolested by other peoples, who would be deemed as foreign imperialists, occupiers, oppressors, etc.

But without nationalist parties in power implementing nationalist governance, there is no national praxis. There is only theorizing on the future state and criticism of the status quo, propagandizing for the ideology, and the occasional real-world demonstration in defense of it. None of these are inherently negative and that is not the perspective I wish to convey, but on the other hand they are also not terribly productive in actualizing nationalist agenda of creating a space for the flourishing of a people. Nationalist politics has an extremely shallow ceiling of support in a de-nationalized society, and metapolitics (which tends to be more “extreme” than the formal politics) has an even more shallow ceiling. 5PT sees metapolitics as closer to its goals than politics, but where we must innovate is in what we do and not merely what we think.

Tribal praxis does not require political parties or the control of a government administration. It requires proximity and a sense of solidarity and cohesion. Let us imagine for a moment what possibilities there might be for, say, twenty Western families living within twenty minutes of one another, as opposed to one hundred bloggers and activists living between California, Virginia, and New York.

  • Children could be homeschooled together.
  • Consumer goods could be bought in bulk at cheaper rates from big-box stores and redistributed more efficiently than twenty atomized households purchasing exactly what each needed.
  • Services could be provided to each other at cheaper rates and in such a way that economic activity is kept inside the community, such as home and auto repair, manual labor, tutoring, tech service, etc.
  • Depending on the location (rural, ex-urban, suburban), housing could be bought and rented at non-exploitative rates and without the use of outside brokers or realtors.
  • Public social events could be attended as a group with greater frequency.
  • Internal social events could be held with greater frequency.
  • Clubs, house churches, lodges, and other associations can be formed. Property can be bought or rented for them through the raising of “tithes.” There’s no temple without a congregation first.

The general principle of tribal praxis is to go outside of one’s network only as necessary. Resources should be kept internal as much as possible. Opportunities should be afforded to the in-group first. And so forth. All of these build a sense of cohesion and loyalty, and thus a stronger identity. And they are all impossible through the model of purely focusing on politics or metapolitics. Policies and ideas are important. But so are groceries and your social life. So is the education of your children. So is having a sense of ritual to your daily life. So is treating your money like the precious asset it is and being shrewd with it.

In capitalist democracy, shopping and voting are almost inseparable acts. There are many products that both “liberals” and “conservatives” mutually consume, but there are also plenty which are selected or rejected for ideological reasons. The Western diaspora must be even more radical in how we vote with our money. Who do we buy from and how much do we pay for it? Who do we rent from? Who employs us? What do we put that money back into? If more money flows out of the tribe than into it, growth will be harder, and it will start to assimilate.

The other essential feature of tribal praxis, beyond creating a parallel society, is to reproduce that parallel society. We cannot rely only on conversion or on disaffected young men with a cause—for even the Männerbund, the most ancient of virtuous institutions, is only part of a society and not the society itself.

In a recent post entitled “Restoration: A Modest Proposal,” NRx blogger Quas Lacrimas writes how one might go about, well, breeding higher quality people. Mainly, one would want to identify families with high quality members—as he puts it, with “high[er than] average levels of the kind of traits you would want in a leader. (Or a king.)”—and try to bring them together and repeat the process generations over and over. The initial hurdle will be finding wives for the first generation:

You want the wives to come from families with similar qualities. They do not need to be exceptionally bright stars among their siblings; even if they are only “average,” they may well be too smart for their own good. Hold back your misgivings about whether such wives as these will make these young men happy: probably not, but oh well. In TCY, a woman from a talented family probably does not aspire to be the wife of a talented man and mother to five talented children. She will probably have attended (or still be enrolled in) college, for example; it simply cannot be helped. So long as the girls are not human rights lawyers or “community organizers” everything will probably turn out all right, and if you catch them young enough you (or more accurately, your budding Männerbund) may be able convince them that pretty girls don’t need to go to med school or apply for internships at Goldman.

And thereafter, grandchildren too must be guided towards good breeding, though this should be less difficult given their own quality and their parents’ generation.

While 5PT is not particularly interested in creating a new aristocracy per se, it would be wise of the members of the future diaspora tribe to look for certain traits in their spouses. Since political views are partially heritable, it may be possible to successively breed each generation to be more and more ethnocentric and clannish, that is to say more tribal. We are not Pashtuns yet, but if we do not become more like them, in the long run we will become even less like ourselves. Civilization, after all, boils down to memes and genes. Who will survive the managerial melting pot?

Source: https://fifthpolitical.wordpress.com/2017/05/21/tribal-praxis-versus-national-praxis/

Related

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

16 Comments

  1. Ted
    Posted July 2, 2017 at 2:07 am | Permalink

    Furthermore, why would it be wrong for Whites to move outside of their traditional nations if they are threatened in their own nations?”

    And where would they go? Why should they leave to make room for the likes of diaspora Chinese? People who have their on nation state (racially speaking).

    There’s an easier solution: all non-Whites, including diaspora Chinese, should leave White nations. One would think that any Chinese person who was truly concerned about “White preservation” would have as their primary focus convincing their co-ethnics to leave White folks in peace, leave White nations, rather than rhapsodizing about how wonderfully powerful diaspora Chinese are.

    “I consider myself a friend of the White race. ”

    Then advocate repatriation. China is your country regardless of its policies. So, the “one child policy” was unfair? Maybe it was. The solution is not for Chinese to come to America so as to have 2+ children. Why can’t we just be left alone? So, what? Whites have to be diaspora exiles from their own nations, and their niche space filled up by migrating Chinese?

    • Posted July 2, 2017 at 5:59 am | Permalink

      I see that the criticism is not actually addressing my points. I am not praising ‘how powerful the Chinese diaspora’ is. In fact, I am not saying that at all. I said that we cannot be entirely safe even outside of China because the Communist persecution of dissidents is a worldwide phenomenon.

      I have only suggested that trying to achieve power is necessary for a diaspora group, and thereby I am suggesting that Whites need to be able to defend themselves against just not just persecution inside their traditional nations but also outside of those nations – the theme of worldwide persecution. Everything that I have mentioned about the Chinese diaspora is only to consider the realities of being a diaspora group, and I think that is necessary for Whites to consider if they wish to survive as such.

      I will express my points concisely:
      1. Power is a necessary component for the longterm survival of any diaspora group;
      1.a Power can mean the accumulation of resources for your own people;
      1.b Power can mean acquiring high status for your group (e.g. through education);
      1.c Power can mean being able to get women to maintain high or replacement level fertility;
      2. Racial purity is a necessary behaviour for the preservation of the White diaspora;
      3. Whites can improve their own group by learning lessons from other diaspora groups such as the diaspora Chinese;
      3.a Chinese faced the problem of being unable to break away from the mainstream within the Chinese nation and so Whites can study how they dealt with that while Whites may experience similar problems;
      3.b Chinese faced the problem of hostility towards them as a group in new environments where they chose to live and if Whites have to move outside of their traditional nations or even if they stay in the rapidly transforming nations that used to be theirs, Whites can study how other groups such aa the Chinese dealt with that;
      3.c Chinese face global persecution being projected from the Chinese mainland and they cannot be totally safe no matter where they are and Whites may one day face similar pwlersecution so it is useful to study this.

      I am emphasising orthopraxy. What the Chinese diaspora does – not what it believes, and no matter what you feel about Chinese as a people – is relevant in the context of diaspora survival. I am extremely willing to learn from anyone because I just want to survive, and I assume that you want the same. Being able to survive as a diaspora depends on one’s ability to adapt – and you can adapt more efficiently when you study other groups.

      My concern is not really what you think about yout study subjects. The discussion is not about what you feel about me or others – it is about the realities of diaspora survival and it is about the quest for truth. I am not offended by anything that is said. I am immune to being triggered, since I am only interested in learning.

      I have learned a great deal from White Nationalists because they make valid points, and that is why I am a diligent reader of White Nationalist works and articles. I find that what they say is extremely relevant. I am merely a person who is very adaptive. I just want to know the truth, because knowledge is power.

      With the 5PT, I am merely advising that an emphasis on power – as well as the study of other diaspora groups no matter their ethnicity – is realistic. I am merely making a friendly statement as a contribution to the preservation of the White race. The acceptance of the quest for power as well as the quest for truth is vital for diaspora survival. In essence I am saying: ‘The 5PT sounds like a real strategy. I think that an emphasis on this and that is still missing. I recommend those realities be included in the theory.’

      As for repatriation, I would not be against such a policy and I have often suggested this to Whites – but at present there is going to be no mass reptriation policy. At the moment, Whites need to adapt to diaspora life – and of course diaspora Whites can try to convince people of the dire need for a repatriation policy. Whatever happens, Whites still need to study realities related to their survival. The more you know, the better your chances. That is why I am being completely open for exchange of practical information. There is a lot I can share about the Chinese diaspora and the realities of diaspora life. I am doing this because I think it is moral to be open and there is a lot I can learn as well while I am sharing whatever I know about the subject.

      I understand how you feel – but your wounds cannot be treated if you focus only on how you feel. I am listening to how you feel, and I am saying the best way to deal with your feelings is to treat your wounds. I have read many comments now about what I am supposed to be saying – but I am not saying those things at all. Instead, I am thinking from a completely different frame of mind. I am being completely practical. I hear your pain, I see the suffering of your people, so I am telling you what helps against those wounds. You can hate or dislike the doctor – but do that later when your wounds are treated. Priority is to survive this dire situation, and as a human being, I just care you survive. Doctors also just treat their patients no matter who they are. That is what I feel is the moral thing to do.

      I am saying it is irrelevant whether you like or dislike another diaspora group – at least acknowledge they may have the knowledge you need for your own survival. Titus Quintius quotes Sun Tzu a lot, and so he does value Chinese philosophy. He is being practical for ensuring White survival. He does not care whether that knowledge is Chinese – he is just focusing on trying the cure the wounds of the White race. Titus is a practical person.

      I get you have been victimised. I get you have pain. So let’s be practical and improve your people’s situation. All my suggestions are for the well-being of Whites. I am against anti-White ideas because I find that immoral – and I am thinking from a pro-White frame of mind because I consider that the only moral and pro-human way of thinking. I am not a misanthropic person – I do not want to be like that. So I am being completely open for exchange and I am making kind suggestions for the welfare of Whites. My suggestions can be improved upon – I am ready to discuss and learn. I am never saying that I have all the answers, and that is also why I am reading pro-White sites. Since I know that my group does not have all the answers either, I am always looking for answers anywhere I can find them. I do not care where I can find them, but I am just looking for the truth. I am just really determined to survive, and I know Whites want to survive too so they also need to get answers no matter where they are from – answers mean survival. What I know about Jews is a huge aid to my survival as a Chinese, and that is why I am forever thankful to Whites. You have opened my eyes about this.

      • Ted
        Posted July 2, 2017 at 8:28 am | Permalink

        The idea that a diaspora group needs power to survive is hardly a revelation (although one can ask how powerful the Roma are – a counterargument would be that they (1) have not protected their racial purity [to the extent such exists for any group – I refer here to preservation of pre-existing genetic interests] and (2) exist in White nations, and for most part only in White nations, due to the weakness and excessive tolerance of Whites – which we cannot depend upon with others).

        Being that it is obvious; I’m not sure what the point is. The author of this piece has already asserted that Whites should be more ethnocentric; no doubt he supports diaspora Whites being as powerful as possible. Can we learn from other groups, including Chinese? Most certainly.

        But let us be honest. Your initial comment was not merely objective advice giving but was making positive value judgments about the Chinese diaspora and how harmless it is for the natives:

        “Chinese diaspora people have no meddled with the politics of their host nations, but they did acquire power for their own safety…Power can turn into a beautifil structure. You can build a nice and safe house for yourself…Jews want to use that power to destroy others. Chinese use that power to keep themselves safe.”

        To those who have suffered from the presence of Chinese in their nations, such comments are ill-received and raise questions about intent. There are many Whites who, lacking experience with Chinese, view that ethny with rose-colored glasses. Making false assertions about the benevolence of the Chinese diaspora does not help.

  2. JRB
    Posted June 30, 2017 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

    Titus, you are focusing on exactly the issues that are the most important and don’t get a fraction of the attention that they deserve. And ironically, it is often these close knit tribes/groups that don’t associate with their host countries that end up wielding the most power within it.
    Keep up the great work.

  3. Posted June 30, 2017 at 4:14 am | Permalink

    Chinese have done it like this for centuries. Dissidents, realising China is hopeless, left China and formed their own diaspora communities abroad. China would not tolerate the model proposed in the 5th political theory. They would immediately persecute everyone involved. However, Chinese solved that by moving abroad and forming their own diaspora communities. I talk a lot about purity on my blog and I agree with a lot the author says. My idea is also basically that we do not necessarily need a nation-state. I think ethnic power is important, though. If your group has no status or power, you cannot protect your own interests. Chinese diaspora people have no meddled with the politics of their host nations, but they did acquire power for their own safety. Power is a necessity. Purity is the fundament on which to build, power is the structure that you build. Power can turn into a beautifil structure. You can build a nice and safe house for yourself. Who doesn’t want that? Who doesn’t want power? I have studied many diaspora communities and they all have a desire for power. Jews want to use that power to destroy others. Chinese use that power to keep themselves safe. Power is not a bad thing, but it depends on how you use it – and how effective that is for pursuing your own interests first. I would love to discuss. You are always welcome on my blog for exchange of ideas. I support the preservation of the White race.

    • Ted
      Posted July 1, 2017 at 3:39 am | Permalink

      First, members of the majority in the Anglosphere and Southeast Asia may well have a more negative view of the Chinese diasporas in their nations than what is written here. Second, Titus Quintius promotes White diasporas because Whites are losing their nations to outside invaders (including diaspora Chinese). Chinese on the other hand have their own nation state, one which they should attempt to fix rather than colonize other nations. Third, is “White preservation” consistent with Chinese diasporas in our nations? Why must we have “powerful” foreign diasporas? China wouldn’t stand for it; they resisted the “foreign devils” and eventually drove them out. Good for them, I agree – China for the Chinese. But then maybe the Chinese shouldn’t have taken over Vancouver?

      • Posted July 1, 2017 at 10:50 am | Permalink

        Whites left Europe because they did not always feel comfortable with the political situation over there, and that is why they moved to Australia, New Zealand, and North America. These places offered new opportunities and new freedoms. Were Whites wrong to leave Europe? Many White dissident groups left Europe and there were many other groups of Whites as well. It was no black-and-white situation, because they had very real human needs. I understand the feelings of Whites toward Chinese – and I detest Communists and other ideological scum as well. At the same time, there are also dissident Chinese who have views much closer to dissident Whites. I see Jews and Communists as our common enemies. Personally I always feel great admiration for Whites and I am always trying to understand them. I have very positive experiences with Whites, and I believe White preservation is not just a goal worth pursuing but a necessary moral goal for humanity. I reject racism against White on principle. I do not like what the Communists or Jews say about Whites. When I see Whites, I see human beings – I do not see evil, inherently racist, criminal, colonialist, imperialist monsters. Whites are just ordinary – and yet also extraordinary – human beings. I agree with White moral views, and unfortunately I do not see those with Blacks, Muslims, Communists and Jews. Whites tend to be very moral. That’s very special. The moral nature of Whites is a huge contribution to humanity. Communists seek to destroy morality in China – already since before the Cultural Revolution. People who have strong moral views will find they are unwelcome dissidents. Once upon a time that was the same for Europeans who held different moral views from those around them, and so they moved to North America and other places of the world. The reason I talked about the Chinese diaspora is for the sake of White preservarion. I believe the study of the Chinese diaspora – and the challenges they faced – can be useful for Whites who wish to organise their own diaspora. I am making this friendly suggestion because for moral reasons I believe in the preservation of the White race and I can always help providing information about the lessons from the Chinese diaspora if that is useful for the purpose of preventing White extinction. I am eager to share what I know and I hope that it will aid your survival. I just feel this is the moral thing to do because Whites are fellow humans.

        • Ted
          Posted July 1, 2017 at 1:53 pm | Permalink

          Again, and no offense, but there is a clear difference here. The author of this piece is talking about an internal diaspora – Whites being in a diaspora in their own homelands (including in Europe itself). The Chinese diaspora is in other people’s nations. An analysis of Chinese behavior would be helpful if there were anti-communist Chinese living within the PRC itself separating themselves from the System (and even there the parallels are not the same since the separation is ideological and not racial/ethnic). The response may be that the authoritarian nature of the PRC state would make such an internal diaspora impossible. Yet, the West is becoming ever-more-hostile to White interests – by the time an internal diaspora is necessary for Whites, the level of authoritarianism may be the same.

          Thus a problem: if Chinese cannot found diaspora communities among members of their own ethny that differ ideologically, can Whites separate from those that differ both racially and ideologically, and under circumstances of equal repression as in the PRC? Or will the racial differences make diaspora separation easier by clearly delineating the differences?

          Regardless, the initial comment about the Chinese diaspora bothers some here, as it implied that the “powerful” Chinese diaspora does not harm native interests. It does. In fact MacDonald’s “Diaspora Peoples” has a section on the Overseas Chinese if I recall correctly. There are problems. Separation is the answer.

          • Posted July 1, 2017 at 3:07 pm | Permalink

            I do not understand why the truth should cause offense to me, because there is no such thing as ‘offensive truth’.

            A dissident Chinese diaspora in the PRC is absolutely impossible, and that is why I am making a kind suggestion for studying the Chinese diaspora. The conditions in China
            could become similar to – or exactly the same – as yours. The model for the White diaspora within White nations might even conpletely fail if lessons are not learned.

            Furthermore, why would it be wrong for Whites to move outside of their traditional nations if they are threatened in their own nations? Based on human needs, I find it moral that they do so – and I would not oppose this. Wherever Whites try to ensure their continued existence, they are fellow humans who are merely trying to survive.

            I have serious doubts the Western political environment will remain as tolerant to Whites as it is now. I believe you are in a spiral towards increasingly anti-White political attitudes. The Jews are behind this push, and they will not let you be.

            What I am trying to hint at with my emphasis on power for diaspora Whites is that you won’t survive without power. Jews are a well-organised minority overly focused on acquiring power for their own ingroup.

            How Chinese acquired power against tremendous odds as a minority wherever they went provides practical lessons for Whites how to preserve their own communities in hostile environments – whether inside or outside their traditional nations. I am concerned about Whites as Whites – I am not concerned about where on this planet they live.

            Every minority – or diaspora group – will, if it wishes to survive, try to create a more friendly environment for itself. The easiest way to do this is to acquire power. You can use power to at least make sure others won’t harm you. The concerns of being a diaspora are of a different dimension from those of being a people controlling a nation.

            Dissident Chinese do not control China – so it is not their nation. Dissident Westerners do not control Western nations, and so those nations aren’t theirs. This creates a situation where dissidents have to become a diaspora or perish under the assimilative pressures of the majority.

            I did, for instance, oppose the one-child policy in China. This policy was extremely unfair to Han Chinese (90% of the population in China). We were forced to have less than 2 children (therefore our fertility became below replacement level and our families were destroyed with an unnatural structure where there are 2 parents and 4 grandparents we have to take care of). However, ethnic minorities (10% of the population in China) were exempt from this policy. The result is that ethnic minorities have been growing exponentially and they higher higher birthrates than the suicidally low birthrates of Han Chinese. If this trend continues indefinitely as the Han Chinese birthrate continues to drop (even under the new two-child policy) and the ethnic minorities continue to outbreed the Han Chinese, China will one day be inherited by minorities – or at least look a lot less Han Chinese than today.

            I count name countless policies I disagree with. However, serious opposition to Chinese Communist policies is impossible in mainland China. It is a bit similar to how it is impossible to question Western policy on multiculturalism, immigration and the Holocaust – but only in China any such dissent will cost you your life.

            Conditions we experience in China is what Westerners should seek to prevent for themselves. They must absolutely seek to create more White-friendly environments – and to this end they need power. If this fails, then Whites will come to empathise with what Chinese dissidents experience in China. Even outside China, Chinese dissidents are being persecuted – by people loyal to the Communist Party. Even when Whites manage to get out of the West, the persecution may follow them abroad. The global persecution Chinese dissidents face is the same you may one day face – and this is a possibility you should consider seriously for your own sake, your children’s sake and your people’s sake.

            I believe in Whites’ ability to overcome tremendous odds. There are a lot of experiences we can share. I am open for exchange between us so as to help you survive. I am benefitting greatly from the information shared by White Nationalists and similar-minded Whites. I see this information as valuable to humanity, and it has made me partocularly aware of how Jews are subverting the West. With the information provided by pro-White Westerners, anti-Communist Chinese can also significantly improve their survival strategies. At the same time, while I am someone who is deeply grateful, I know there is also a lot I can share with you – to further your cause that I agree with.

            Knowledge is power, and I admire what people such as Prof. Duchesne, Prof. MacDonald and others are doing for Whites. I have read countless pro-White works – I have read all books of MacDonald and Duchesne – and I agree with pro-White advocacy and I support it based on human morality. Prof. Duchesne has even published an article by me, I have regularly commented at AmRen and Red Ice, and I have my own explicitly pro-White blog that focuses on racial purity as a major concern (esp. for diaspora communities). I consider myself a friend of the White race. I do not see a point in being hostile to Whites – I think it is immoral. I do not like doing things that go against my nature, and so I am just doing what I believe is right. I do not want to live in a world where immorality is the norm. Liberals and Communists are creating a world I detest. For as long as I live, I will fight for morality.

          • Ted
            Posted July 2, 2017 at 2:03 am | Permalink

            “Furthermore, why would it be wrong for Whites to move outside of their traditional nations if they are threatened in their own nations?”

            And where would they go?

            There’s an easier solution: all non-Whites, including diaspora Chinese, should leave White nations. One would think that any Chinese person who was truly concerned about “White preservation” would have as their primary focus convincing their co-ethnics to leave White folks in peace, leave White nations, rather than rhapsodizing about how wonderfully powerful diaspora Chinese are.

            “I consider myself a friend of the White race. ”

            The advocate repatriation. China is your country regardless of its policies. So, the “one child policy” was unfair? Maybe it was. The solution is not for Chinese to come to America so as to have 2+ children. Why can’t we just be left alone? So, what? What’s have to be disapora exiles from their own nations, and their niche space filled up by migrating Chinese?

          • Ben
            Posted July 4, 2017 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

            I am not leaving America because I intend to keep my guns. From my cold dead hands.

  4. jim
    Posted June 30, 2017 at 12:39 am | Permalink

    Interesting, I was just thinking about this today while reflecting on a story about how orthodox jews are taking over small towns in NY. They basically move in en masse, ignoring other groups and their needs. Those same jews have 7 kids per woman, and are the main source of jewish reproduction in the USA. There is something to be said for the model that you are proposing, as it seems to work for other groups.

    The other thing we have to get across is that small family sizes are disadvantageous. They narrow your network, leaving you with few siblings with whom to collaborate.

  5. Andrew Fraser
    Posted June 29, 2017 at 11:08 pm | Permalink

    I’ve looked at your exposition of 5PT on your website. Your key concepts of subnational tribalism and diaspora community are of crucial importance to an understanding of the biocultural evolution, present predicament, and future prospects of WASPs around the world. Or, so I argue in The WASP Question (Arktos, 2011).

    You might find more grist for your mill in both Chapter 7: “Archeofuturism: Of Patriot Kings and Anglo-Saxon Tribalism in the Twenty-First Century” and Chapter 8: “Palingenesis: The Postmodern Rebirth of Anglo-Saxon Christendom”.

  6. To pioneer or Settle
    Posted June 29, 2017 at 10:48 pm | Permalink

    I am inspired and optimistic about the 5PT. A tribal praxis would surely give a sense of purpose, incentives (intrinsic and extrinsic) to achieve, and save some money on services/bulk discounts. Small family businesses would probably arise and be handed down through a family over time. Anyway, a deeper question is how 5PT would be begun, as there are multiple options to choose from. The pioneer or settler question: do we start from scratch on land with no infrastructure, or do we settle in an area that already contains infrastructure (public roads, businesses, water towers, electricity+fiber optics, power plants)? I guess the answer is here already, the path of least resistance is to be a diaspora in an area with infrastructure. As with all projects, especially one like this endeavor, it seems the beginning will be the most difficult. How to get the desired people to move, hire professional laborers and white collars to work towards social-economic autonomy within legal grounds (to minimize interaction with the out-group). If civilizations go through cycles, then a local 5PT diaspora would too, I can see once everything is settled and a community is formed, everything established, things might become stagnant and generations downstream might lose the essence. But it is a tribal praxis, so we can still outcast/banish the bad inheritors, leaving them bare to whatever international-state is ruling at the time. Either way once this is implemented we can indeed replicate and improve it in other regions. A book may need to be written to paint an image and a blueprint for what is required and what hurdles must be jumped over. And an analysis of other diasporas and how they maintain cohesion, such examples like the more isolated Amish, or the more connected to society Mormons. Our diasporas could differ to such an extent too.

  7. Posted June 29, 2017 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

    “…if we do not become more like them, in the long run we will become even less like ourselves.”

    Brilliantly put, Titus.

    Kindle Subscription
  • Our Titles

    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