White Nationalism - Key Concepts
CONCEPT 1. - There is nothing sacred about having several races in the same country.
If having several different races in the same country works, then fine. Keep the arrangement. If it doesn't, then scrap it. There are no moral imperatives involved in the deciding whether to have one country or several. The issue should be decided based on practicality. The solution that reduces conflict and provides the greatest degree of happiness to the most people is the one to be pursued.
In the United States, we are taught that racial integration is a moral imperative. This morality is the self-interested creation of planters and industrialists interested in cheap labor. It is a morality created to facilitate what Alvin Toffler describes as the "second wave" industrial economy.
It was very much in the interests of planters and industrialists to import whomever they wish to facilitate rapid growth and keep wages low. Any cultural and non-economic costs of learning to adapt to one another were imposed on the existing inhabitants and were not borne by the planters or industrialists individually.
In other parts of the world, races come to be included in the same nation by way of military conquest and colonization. For colonizers, drawing borders in such a way as to include several races makes it possible to pit one race against another, rendering the colony easier to control. Niccolo Machiavelli described the strategy 400 years ago in his work "The Prince."
CONCEPT 2. - When several races are placed in a single country, conflict arises.
For all the talk about the "brotherhood of man" examples of several races getting along in a single country for an extended period are either few or non-existent. Different races coexist temporarily only under repressive and totalitarian regimes. In the absense of force and repression, conflict escalates.
Racial and ethnic groups always compete.
With the advent of "multiculturalism" the U.S. is rapidly balkanizing. It is only a matter of time before conflict escalates.
CONCEPT 3. - Races will choose different methods of competition depending on their circumstances.
In the United States, we are taught that majorities always oppress minorities.
In truth, both minority and majority races compete for status and power in a multi-racial country. They typically compete using different means and strategies. Obviously, a minority will attempt to conceal its aggressive agenda so as to lull the majority into political complacency.
To be successful, minorities must be content with indirect racial victories masked from majority view by universalisms like "fairness," "tolerance" and "compassion". To be successful, minorities must conceal their explicit racial agenda from the majority.
However, the achilles heel of minority control is their ability to keep the non-elite members of their own group content with the fruits of this indirect aggression against the majority.
Once a significant number of any racial minority becomes dissatisfied and desires the more intense pleasures of direct racial confrontation with the majority, the game is very near an end.
In contrast, with raw numbers on their side, majorities will almost always assert their racial interests in direct ways. Because of this, it is easy to portray a majority as crude and insensitive when it begins to assert its racial interests in the public debate even if only in self-defense.
CONCEPT 4. - A minority will expend great effort in defining the conditions of its interaction with the majority.
The most successful minorities will expend great amounts of energy convincing their racial opponents that they are not competing. Competition and conflict take many forms. Outright violence gets the headlines. However, less visible forms of ethnic conflict always occur. The political struggles for preferences and group advantages that take place in the legislatures always favor organized minorities over complacent majorities.
Successful minorities will attempt to dominate all communications media to the point where they can prevent the dissemination of any message that calls attention to minority racial and ethnic dominance. Only messages of minority victimization are allowed to pass. Serious discussion of these issues in books and periodicals directed at the elites are spoken in "code" so that they cannot alarm the majority.
All a minority need do to dictate the terms of interaction between minority and majority is to define public morality in such a way as to ensure that demands to block negative messages will be obeyed by the majority elites. It does not require direct ownership or control over all communications media.
CONCEPT 5. - Majority elites typically benefit from the presence of minority races and will ordinarily oppose the racial interests of their own kind.
An elite would never allow the importation of a racial minority unless it benefitted from the minority's presence. So naturally, once the minority has arrived, the majority elite will protect that minority as long as the majority elite continues to benefit.
It makes perfect sense that the elite will invent new secular moral imperatives of tolerance and respect for minorities and demand that the majority learn, believe and follow those new imperatives.
CONCEPT 6. - New immigrants struggle to gain supremacy over the earlier arrivals.
If you examine the history of the migrations to the United States, it is clear that each new wave of arrivals struggles to supplant the earlier arrivals and that most such groups succeed.
The earliest arrivals were the Puritans 1620-1680 (largely, descendants of Danish invaders of England) and Scotch-Irish who settled in Appalachia. Once these early arrivals subdued the indians, later arrivals of English Episcopalians sought to displace the Puritans economically and politically. The contest was fought with cultural and political tools, and the new Episcopal arrivals won.
When the earlier arriving Celtic "Anglo Saxons" inhabiting the Southern States attempted to secede, this new Episcopal elite fought the bloodiest war in U.S. history to suppress them.
Beginning in 1880, this Episcopal elite allowed a new wave of Jewish and Southern European immigrants into the U.S. They too supplanted the earlier English Episcopalian elite in wealth, education and political power within 50 years of their arrival.
Immigrant groups will invest a great deal of effort creating myths surrounding the hardships encountered on first arrival to deflect attention from their quick acquisition of economic and political power. The myths about hardship and "discrimination" confer upon these new elites "victim status" which insulates them from criticism by the less fortunate and more complacent descendants of earlier arrivals.
CONCEPT 7 - The masses of a majority race are likely to go along with importation of different races as long as the majority elite demands that new immigrants assimilate.
If the majority elite demands that the new arrivals assimilate, this is a recognition that the current inhabitants do not have to give up their culture to accommodate the new arrivals. New arrivals must strive to become as much like the existing inhabitants as possible and must strive to limit the potential sources of friction.
Once the elites of the majority race drop their demands for minority assimilation, the minorities will tend to accentuate their differences with the majority. Conflict, whether cultural, political or physical, will escalate.
CONCEPT 8. - Majority elites will abandon integrationism as soon as it ceases to benefit them.
Until approximately the mid-1980's large corporations and government bureaucracies created hundreds of thousands of middle management positions to be filled by "generalist" college graduates.
New computer technologies are rapidly replacing these "generalist" knowledge workers. Prior to the advent of these technologies, "how you behaved" was more important than your technical knowledge. To be assured a middle class position in one of these bureaucracies, you only needed to learn the liberal propaganda at college. Not much else mattered.
In exchange for belief in liberalism and integrationism, Euro- American elites were rewarded with middle class jobs. In short, they were bought off. There were direct economic rewards for liberalism.
That is no longer so.
Race based hiring preferences have largely eliminated access to these middle management jobs in government and regulated utilities. Technology is eliminating these positions in the private sector.
In the past, you went to college to learn what to say. One slip of the anti-egalitarian tongue and you ended up in the mail room.
Absent 1300 plus combined SAT scores and critical knowledge skills, you will end up in the mail room anyway if you are White.
Increasingly, the behavior and manners of egalitarian belief are becoming less relevant to earning a middle class living.
In the future it is going to become much more difficult for the minority elites to find sufficient numbers of Euro-American front men throughout our institutions to lull the majority back to sleep. Anti-egalitarian dissenters will proliferate among Euro- Americans within the information elite.
It is going to be much more difficult to sustain the idea in the minds of the average European-American that this is their country.
Back to Main Page
(c) 1996 Yggdrasil. All rights reserved. Distribute Freely.