In Defense of Ethno-nationalism

The world of “neo-reaction”, which roughly consists of some blogs and writers who are against the current political system, and want some kind of non-democratic replacement, has come out against ethno-nationalism, or white nationalism, recently.

Neo-reactionaries tend to be inspired by Moldbug, or at least encouraged by him. Neo-reactionaries are anti-democratic, but if you examine closely not deeply in conflict with the system. They are race realists, but are not driven by any sense of racial pride or unity. They are mostly pro-business, pro-capitalism, and pro-technology. They are mostly against the destructive effects of political correctness, and the ridiculousness of multiculturalism and feminism.

Moldbug wanted- I speak of him in the past tense, since while the man behind him is still around, he seems to have wrapped up his blogging- only to replace the system with control based on the capitalist principle of ownership. This would seem to describe “techno-capitalism”, and “anarcho-capitalism” would seem only to spread the control around, but not so much as to result in actual chaos, or pardon me, anarchy.

Progressive capitalists don’t really have a problem with this. They control a great deal through what they own, and they would be happy to control everything by owning everything. Capitalism is inherently progressive, which is the defect of all capitalist or business-based conservatism.

This is why the man behind Moldbug has not been defenestrated, or why Justine Tunney promotes this sort of thing openly, without a pseudonym and while remaining a Google employee. Fundamentally, these people are as opposed to non-elite ethnic loyalty as the current rulers are, although they don’t have the visceral hatred they do for it.

Neo-reaction has been described as having the three branches of ethno-nationalism, traditionalism, and techno-capitalism. With this break, I think that can’t be said to be true any more. I was never a neo-reactionary, and traditionalism can’t tolerate techno-capitalism. So what the ne0-reactionaries call neo-reaction is just techno-capitalism, and they are just techno-capitalists.

So, this is the divide. What problems do techno-capitalists have with ethno-nationalism? One that it is anti-capitalist, two that it is democratic, three that it is socialist, and four that it is traditionalist in a way that suits the needs of non-elite whites.

Techno-capitalism claims to be capitalistic, but it isn’t really this either. Techno-capitalists come from tech businesses, which did not spring fully formed like Venus from the seashell, but were the product of heavy subsidy and investment from the US government. The Internet, microprocessors, GPS, cellular telephony- all dependent on government research, investment, and franchises. This was true of the original Industrial Revolution as well, and anywhere you find large sums of business or capitalist cash, you find the state right behind it. The state behind modern technology is mostly the US Department of Defense, a product of the pseudo-nationalist New Deal state, formed to control the excesses of communism- itself a product of progressive capitalism- like a wildland firefighter watching a back burn, and to control non-elite whites and keep them from turning to fascism.

Ethno-nationalism is against capitalism, when capitalism is defined as letting businessmen do whatever they want because they are Promethean heroes, which they are not.

The criticism that ethno-nationalists are democratic and socialist can be addressed together. Techno-capitalists dislike both democracy and socialism, neglecting to realize that democracy and socialism actually work pretty well, when they are confined to white people. Seriously, Norway is going to be Norway, and Nigeria will be Nigeria, capitalist, communist, democratic or authoritarian, or any combination. Ethno-nationalism is for democracy and socialism, when they are defined as white people participating in their government and having some insurance against illness and hardship.

Theoretically techno-capitalism can be allied with traditionalism. Techno-capitalists are pretty traditional people socially and sexually. Mark Zuckerberg’s marriage to his pre-Facebook college girlfriend is only the reflection of how people have mated from the beginning of time. An early match with another young person of your social class takes care of all legitimate human needs and these people are too busy doing business to be having lots of sex and romance. Traditionalists are fine with a monarchical state- monarchical in its literal sense as a non-democratic concentration of power in one entity- so there is no obvious conflict with techno-capitalists.

The trouble is in traditional traditional societies, businessmen and capitalists have never had anything like the power they do now, and in a re-established traditional society they could not, since their interests are in too great a variance with society at large.

Actual traditionalism- the kind that sustains people, and thus is of interest to non-elite whites- depends on traditional sex roles, traditional relationships between employers, traditional family relationships, and traditional patterns of consumption. When techno-capitalists say they like “tradition”, I think they mean the religious tradition of England and Italy, where religion is pretty but doesn’t cramp anybody’s style too much.

Techno-capitalism is both a system already in power, and one impractical to establish. Ethno-nationalism is both a system impractical to implement, and yet at the same time already in power. Everything that moves and sustains life is ethno-nationalism. Reality is ethno-nationalism, and you can’t get any more powerful than that.


About thrasymachus33308

I like fast cars, fast women and southern-fried rock. I have an ongoing beef with George Orwell. I take my name from a character in Plato's "Republic" who was exasperated with the kind of turgid BS that passed for deep thought and political discourse in that time and place, just as I am today. The character, whose name means "fierce fighter" was based on a real person but nobody knows for sure what his actual political beliefs were. I take my pseudonym from a character in an Adam Sandler song who was a obnoxious jerk who pissed off everybody.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to In Defense of Ethno-nationalism

  1. Reblogged this on Aryan Skynet and commented:

    Reblogged from Deconstructing Leftism.

  2. Pingback: In Defense of Ethno-nationalism | Neoreactive

  3. icareviews says:

    “the pseudo-nationalist New Deal state, formed to control the excesses of communism”

    Some might have supported the New Deal on the basis of that rationale, but it showed its true colors by conquering half of Europe on behalf of Joseph Stalin and doing what it could to put Mao in power.

    About that “Neo” in “Neoreaction” . . .

    Why not post this to Skynet first? Hipster Racist, Don Logan, and I reblog the original content at Aryan Skynet to our personal blogs. The idea is to have the traffic flowing in.

  4. Remnant says:

    Excellent post with a lot to mull over. Some of the neoreaction sphere is realistic about race by which I don’t just mean that they are “race realists” in the sense that we all know, but also that they feel the practical solution to the current existence of multi-racial societies is simply to rule over the “lesser races” rather than kicking them out. While they don’t particularly spell it out, I would expect that actual measures employed would include cordoning certain races off.

    As for traditionalism and techno-capitalism not mixing, I don’t think this is true. As with so many other things, the European new right is way ahead of us on this. I highly recommend Guillaume Faye’s Archeofuturism and his more recent Sex and Deviance, both of which works discuss in depth the way that traditional norms (archetypes) can and will work together with technology.

    Another person who has expressed this idea in less detailed terms is Collin Cleary who has repeatedly made the point that the spirit of, e.g., Asutra (Odinism) is not about dressing up as Vikings, drinking horns, learning Old Norse, etc. but is about the spirit of the people and what they can create now. A number of his essays get at this idea albeit in less direct terms than Faye. See Cleary’s review essay of the Uniqueness of Western Civilization, his extensive essay on Wagner and his brilliant truly seminal work The Stones Cry Out. All are on Counter-Currents, and the last one will be in his new collection. Other pieces of his (also in the new collection) such as The Fourfold and The Ninefold may also be of interest in this regard.

  5. tteclod says:

    While I split with you guys on details, I, like you, don’t identify with Neoreaction in part because I can’t stomach the anti-ethnic ethos of that group. There is a point where one must recognize that centuries and millenia of human adaptation are non-trivial, and that those adaptations are not identical across ethnicities adapted to widely scattered geographies. Such is the seed of ethnonationationalism, wherein one recognizes like heritage must unite for mutual support. Rejection of that natural conclusion, selectively applied, is the a pernicious genocidal tactic.

    Even if we are equal, a specious argument, we are not equivalent. Neoreaction would do well to remember that not all peoples may be replaced.

  6. Hizzle says:

    I think Steve Sailer’s a bit less pernicious than Moldbug, and I guess I’d describe him as publicly techno-capitalist, with some Sub Rosa ethno-nationalism. Feelings about race are tied to status, and while Sailer has publicly disavowed white nationalism, I think privately he likes it, but won’t say so, because upper-middle class people aren’t supposed to like white nationalists.

    The problem with a lot of working-class white nationalists is that they’re good Americans, and, as such, believe in the Easter Bunny. They think Obama’s a communist Muslim, despite Wall-Street’s heavy backing of him (at least in the first campaign), and a lot of them believe, as all good Americans do, that if they worship rich people, they might, just might, become rich people themselves.

    Democracy, socialism, and actually any political system, will work just fine when there are mostly just white people around. European-style social democracy still kind of works, because there are still enough white people in Western Europe, and not too many (yet) brown and black people gumming up the works. Actually, the brown people (Muslims) are a much larger problem than the black people there.

  7. Can we have paleo-reaction soon?

  8. At this point you have White Nationalism or you have Civil War. The Bullshit about America not being White because of savage Indians and savage Slaves was always a specious argument that only an unhistorically illiterate buffoon would accept especially coming from Zionists. However, the total war on Europe by invaders that are supposedly necessary for capitalism has finally taken the mask off the smelly rodent in the room who isn’t a 800 pound Gorilla but a tiny mouse.

  9. Pingback: Notable Headlines, Blogs and Youtubes for 3/22/15 | The Daily Lemming

  10. ascomanni says:

    “ethno-nationalism”… I was born in 1951. My family had just moved to the west coast USA and when my father bought a house he made the conscious decision to buy a home in an all white city. They still had them back then. I thank my father for that decision every day. I now live in a modern “diverse” city, you know the type of place where you’re afraid to walk down the street at night. But I remember what it was like being raised in an ethnically homogeneous community. Let me tell you it was better. It breaks my heart to know that most young people being raised today will never know what it is like to be surrounded by your own. Real tragedy.

  11. Pingback: Outside in - Involvements with reality » Blog Archive » Chaos Patch (#55)

  12. “that democracy and socialism actually work pretty well, when they are confined to white people. Seriously, Norway is going to be Norway,”

    Any socialist economy that is surrounded by market economies parasitically prices their stuff relative to exports & imports so this argument is insufficient at best if you consider the actual situation.

    The argument should be made that those very same white people chose a stupid policy and are wasting years of their time on pointless dead-ends.

  13. Laurence Bergin says:

    Reblogged this on Agent 006.

  14. Pingback: Neo-reactionaries “Signal”- Jim Comes Out Against “Fashism” | Deconstructing Leftism

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s