|
Does Racial Nationalism Trump "Xenophobia"?
by Karl Kammler
Many White Americans innately agree with White Nationalists, but may be standoffish because some aspects of our Movement give the impression of having a "foreign feel." It is also no coincidence that our Jewish detractors play up this "foreign" image in their propaganda, to drive a wedge between our natural American constituency and us. In short, the "xenophobia" of many White Americans trumps their racial nationalism.
Sensing this, many of our more professional, less "hobbyist" organizations have banned the display of swastika flags and the like, but there is much more to be done on the ideological front, beyond adjusting our outward style and forms. Many racialist organizations and activists spend their time pursuing not racial nationalist activities, but "racial internationalist" activities, traveling to speak in Europe, for example, or inviting European activists to speak here.
A nation is more than its defining race. Race is fundamental, but it cannot stand alone as the sole source of a stable and enduring nationhood. The definition of a nation found in Black's Law Dictionary, 6th edition, is very instructive on this point. Black's provides a comprehensive, holistic definition:
A people, or aggregation of men, existing in the form of an organized jural society, usually inhabiting a distinct portion of the earth, speaking the same language, using the same customs, possessing historic continuity, and distinguished from other like groups by their racial origin and characteristics, and generally, but not necessarily, living under the same government and sovereignty. [Montoya v. U.S., 180 261, 21 S.Ct. 358, 45 L.Ed. 521].
Black's definition is far from idiosyncratic; John Jay offers a similar definition of a nation in Federalist No. 2, appropriately titled "Concerning Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence." Jay writes,
It has often given me pleasure to observe that independent America was not composed of detached and distant territories, but that one connected, fertile, widespreading country was the portion of our western sons of liberty. ...With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people -- a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs.
In Black's definition, as well as Jay's, we find that the building blocks of a nation include a common language, history, government, values, symbols, literature, and territory. Race is an inseparable part of that definition, yet its other attributes are not trivial, nor are they devoid of their own import or momentum.
Our enemies instinctively recognize this, and it is reflected in their tactics. They seek to destroy us by chipping away at the exterior pillars that our race created. This is why they have removed George Washington's name from the public schools, invalidated English-only legislation, torn down the Confederate flag from public view, and renamed monuments. Our enemies are systematically working their way toward our core: the destruction of our genetic heritage itself.
The way to defend this essential core is to repel their attacks on our exterior pillars. Of course, this defense must not be launched in the name of the pillars themselves, but in the name of the core that we defend. "Conservatives" usually get this crucial part wrong by substituting euphemistic "proxies" for both the elements of race and the Jews. The best defense, it turns out, is a good offense.
The American Founding Fathers were clearly White separatists. Most readers are already aware of the quotes from Jefferson's Autobiography of 1821 in support of this thesis, and likely also know about the many American statesmen who comprised the membership of the American Colonization Society which founded Liberia as a colony for the repatriation of Black slaves to Africa. White Nationalism is 100% Americanism. This Americanism provides a sound platform for defending our Western core.
Madison Grant, a zoologist with a deep sense of America's special destiny, stated in 1916 in The Passing of the Great Race,
Nature had granted to the Americans of a century ago the greatest opportunity in recorded history to produce in the isolation of a continent a powerful and racially homogenous people and had provided for the experiment a pure race of one of the most gifted and vigorous stocks on earth, a stock free from the diseases, physical and moral, which have again and again sapped the vigor of the older lands. Our grandfathers threw away this opportunity in the blissful ignorance of national childhood and inexperience.
The pain that Grant felt over his wayward American brethren is evident in his writing, and his words should evoke in the truly patriotic reader a similar feeling of loss. Grant's indictment of our shortsighted forebears is a tale of what might have been, and gives us a glimpse of America's true national mission set by our Creator. The "Christian Identity" school of thought articulates this spirit in religious terms, although at base, there is a secular reason for its existence.
Across the Atlantic, National Socialist theoretician Alfred Rosenberg also saw the awesome potential of a White America. He writes in Myth of the Twentieth Century,
The United States of America, according to the universal agreement of all travellers, is the magnificent land of the future. It has the great task of throwing aside all outworn ideas which date from before its foundation. It can proceed with youthful strength to set up the new idea of the racial State, such as some awakened Americans have already apprehended like Grant and Stoddard.
Both supporters and opponents of White American nationalism should learn from Rosenberg's words, particularly his clause about the truths that Americans "have already apprehended." These words highlight the fact that nationalism existed as the legitimate expression of Americanism before, and independently of, German National Socialism.
The German model is not for export, as the National Socialists of the time explained. Some in our Movement seem to derive a sense of strength and hope from the example of the Third Reich, but this is likely a placebo effect, as offensive as that possibility may be to some readers. Those overly enamored by the example of foreign nations, however positive and instructive, can better serve the Cause by focusing upon a future of their [our!] own, as White Americans, and cease looking to the past of a foreign country.
Grant's observation shows that everything in American history is aimed at the completion of a parochial White Nationalist program. The tragedy of the historical record is that Americans keep fumbling the ball. The United States began as a colony, an outpost of European civilization. The "New World" held much promise. The old nations of Europe, more specifically their elite power structures, wanted to secure for themselves a piece of the action here. The Monroe Doctrine was created to hold these foreign, yet still racially compatible, powers at bay.
The Jews, the homegrown parasites of humanity, had designs of their own on America as well. They wanted America for themselves, because they want a world for themselves. They have sought to harness America's great promise and power, wielding it as a tool in their quest for global mastery of the Gentiles. Their manipulation of America into entering World War Two is one of the clearest example of the ends to which the Jews seek to put America (Tel Aviv West). The case of the Second World War also reveals the strategy of the Jews, as we see them attribute to Hitler a motive to "rule the world," when all he clearly sought was Eastern Europe. The Jews simply "project" (to steal a psychoanalytical term from one of their own tribal members) their own imperialistic motives onto the Nazis. The manner in which the Jews organize their State of Israel (a racial-separatist state), and brutally oppress their Arab cousins, also mirrors this tendency to project their distorted view of the Nazis.
A conflict between racial idealism and shortsighted economic gains has defined the American experience since her founding. Benjamin Franklin, for example, warned about the pitfalls of allowing the Jews to do their work unhindered, but his pleas were shuffled into the "to do" pile and were lost. Jefferson's warnings about leaving Black slaves in the U.S. also were ignored. Americans have always found ways to avoid doing what it really takes to clean up their house.
Human beings tend to be short-term thinkers, and often follow the path of least resistance. Jefferson pointed this tendency out in the Declaration of Independence, stating, "all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed." Americans have hatched one "half-assed" measure after another. Segregation was one of these partial Band-Aids, and modern "White flight" is another. Talk of a Northwest Imperative may also fall into this category. While the idea has merit, there is the strong possibility Northwest migration will degenerate into a defensive and defeatist strategy of retreat and evasion, and thus more of the same.
The "Band-Aids" listed above have one thing in common: they are essentially defensive. The Jews have taken advantage of this tendency, and have stolen our freedom one deli slice at a time.
We can still enjoy the majestic future perceived by Grant and Rosenberg. The 1965 Immigration Act initiated America's demographic plunge into Third World status, and it is the logical place to begin cleaning up the problem. Our task is to locate and deport all foreign-born elements that arrived under the 1965 law, including their descendants. This is a monumental endeavor involving the expulsion of well over thirty million people from our shores, but it is the only way to permanently recover our true birthright. If the United States is strong enough to compel foreign governments like the Taliban to leave power and grant "women's rights," then we are strong enough to compel them to take back their long-lost kinsmen. With enough political will, our only obstacles become logistical, and such obstacles can be easily overcome given our race's technical and administrative capabilities.
Our salvation as a nation and a people lies not in a generic and abstract White Nationalism, but a specific, concrete, history-laden, particular and parochial White American nationalism. The Founding Fathers worked with the French against the English during the War for Independence, but they did not idolize the French, the French government, or the ideological underpinnings of the French Revolution. In the end, we do not need the Europeans or other foreign Whites. Working with foreign Whites must not become a crutch. If we cannot recover our existence on our own, and maintain that independence, then we do not have the strong fiber it takes to be a people and keep a nation, and we may as well close up shop.
Like the Founding Fathers, use whatever tactics you find effective. If you want to say "Hitler was right" (and he was), then say so if you think it gives us political traction. Work with the BNP. Proselytize in Russia. But do not lose yourselves, your identity as White Americans, in the process. To steal a phrase from the nigs: "Keep your eyes on the prize." The "prize" is what Grant and Rosenberg saw: a free and independent White American Republic.
KARL KAMMLER
|