Against the culture retarders. Or just plain retards?
Take a look at this nonsense. The mendacity there is breathtaking – as if Richard Spencer is the end all and be all of pan-Europeanism. What a joke. As if Johnson is not familiar with Francis Parker Yockey or Normal Lowell or myself, who used to write for his blog and whose writings on pan-Europeanism were included in the first edition of his New Right compilation book.
But instead of me repeating all the arguments against Johnson’s ethnonationalist screeds, I’ll first comment on something a pan-Europeanist commentator left at that blog.
GrandioseNationalistPosted July 31, 2019 at 6:49 am | PermalinkAs a grandiose Nationalist, I’ve personally grown tired of repeating the same arguments over and over again…
Yes, welcome to the club, my friend. Doesn’t it tell you anything that you have to repeat the same arguments over and over again? Doesn’t it tell you that they are no-character dishonest liars?
…so allow me to make OUR case for extreme Pan-Europeanism. Hence, I’m going to tackle all these points that have been made thus far:
You are wasting your time there, but let’s consider what you have to say.
RICHARD SPENCER: Although his statements about Pan-Euro are admirable, he’s falsely attributed as the sole proponent of our ideas.
Indeed. That’s a classic debating tactic of the dishonest – they search for the worst representative of an idea to set up straw men to easily knock down. As a representative of serious pan-Europeanism, Spencer is a joke. And anyone who would set him up as a major thought leader in this regard has basically abdicated any pretense of being a good faith actor.
Spencer truly is anything but one of us: He’s a fierce proponent of Dugin’s vision of a “United Eurasia” (Greater Israel Inc.), which would’ve United certain White Nations and mixed hem altogether with Mongols and Persians.
True, and Johnson must know this.
Same goes for Constantine Hoffmeister; a Zionist communist who’s all too excited to include Jews in his vision of Eurasia, and an impostor who pretends to be grandiose.
I’ve criticized that individual before.
Further proof of Spencer’s hypocrisy is that his ex is an ethnic Georgian from Russia (who’s also a Duginist and a self confessed Stalinist). Last I checked, Kouprianova and Stalin were not White European and neither are the rest of the Georgian people.
And I sharply criticized Kouprianova’s grasping attempt to paint Georgians as “Southern Europeans.” They are not such genetically, culturally, phenotypically, historically, or geographically. I for one am disgusted by NECs and by admixed “Latinos” who try to pass themselves off as Southern Europeans.
PAN-EUROPEAN TENETS: Pan-Europeanism doesn’t hold that we should head towards homogenizing Europeans: that’s a Ethnonationalist misconceptions.
Better said – ethnonationalist LIES. It doesn’t matter what Yockey (or Lowell) wrote about local sovereignty and maintenance of local cultures, it doesn’t matter what I’ve written on the topic for two decades, no, what “matters” is what Spencer wrote in a tweet or muttered in some Alt Right podcast from an Alexandria loft apartment.
WE BELIEVE THAT WHITE PEOPLE , NO MATTER WHERE THEY COME FROM, FORM AS A WHOLE AN INDIVIDUAL SUPER-ETHNY THAT HAS BEEN BROKEN DOWN OVER THE CENTURIES TO SMALLER POLITICAL UNITS, ONLY FOR THEIR DOMINIONS TO SERVE AS A REGATHERING POINT. Therefore, Pan-Europeanism is more of a consciousness; a way of treating one’s total biological and cultural identity as the most fundamental part of our historical identity.
Yes, this is an excellent statement: “Pan-Europeanism is more of a consciousness; a way of treating one’s total biological and cultural identity as the most fundamental part of our historical identity.” It is first and foremost a worldview, an ideology, a consciousness, a foundation of Identity, not some particular Duginist plan for Eurasianist Empire or some Hoffmeisterian plan for panmixia. Perhaps Johnson should worry more about his HBD buddies and their Jeurasian project if he’s so concerned about losing ethnic identities through mixing. Maybe “Trevor Lynch” can write about that at the anti-White, pro-Hispanic HBD Jew Unz site.
White Nationalism used to be this ALL ENCOMPASSING THEORY that exalted the primacy of race over nation. For centuries the concept of a “generic” Greece was overshadowed by all the individual identities that constitute it (Spartan, Thracian, etc.). It took centuries of Civil Wars for the Greeks to formally unite and form this more “generic” identity. Same things gonna happen with all Europeans in the face of the grave dangers that await us. A NEW NATION WILL BE BORN OUT OF THE STRUGGLES OF THE OLD.
Fair enough. Kai Murros says the same thing. Look, China alone has hundreds of millions more people than all the Whites worldwide combined. Same for India. Even if Whites save themselves from the current threats, the Yellow Peril (and Brownster Peril) will be all too real. I suppose the ethnonationalist answer is for Whites to hide away in their snug hobbit holes in the forest, but I do not think that’ll work out too well.
When we say that OUR RACE IS OUR NATION, we mean it. I am a brother to every Swede, Spaniard, Slovene, WASP, and every other White person that exists. These are my compatriots; the, and the entire European diaspora.
I don’t really get why other Whites don’t fell that way for their own kinsmen.Descent and patriotic White people like John Morgan should always be welcome to have their shot in the gene pool of their host White Nation (namely Hungary in his case). Just because Mr. Morgan isn’t (presumably) an Ethnic Magyar that doesn’t mean that he ought to be separated from them and removed from Hungary.
I disagree about Morgan. He’s an ethnonationalist living in someone else’s nation – a complete hypocrite. And my vision of pan-Europeanism includes Hungary being for the Hungarians. Being part of a greater whole does not obligate the part to agree to dissolution. I agree though that small numbers of fellow Europeans can be assimilated.
AMERICA: America proved to be a centuries-long social experiment about whether all the regathered tribes of Europe would either merge into a life-saving fusion or perish because of their minor differences. Guess who got proved right! The fusion of our nations in America became the source of America’s renaissance in the 20th century (the time between 1920s and the late 80s). America showed that Whites can intermingle with each other, but with non-Whites (like in South America) we cannot.
BALKANS/CZECHOSLOVAKIA: In a Pan-Europeanist world ther wouldn’t be any point in restoring Czechoslovakia or Yugoslavia. Both of these states were based on uniting different nations of the same ethnic-linguistic group (Slavs). Our state would be based on uniting Europeans based on their race, something that hasn’t really been done before in history (except from our colonies). Serbs and Croats share more than 90% of ethnic kinship with one another. However thanks to Ethno-Nationalism both these peoples have fallen into an endless feud with each other (like with a Germany vs France, Russia vs Ukraine, etc., and people have the AUDACITY to call us imperialists? If anything we are grandiose Nationalists.They greatly resemble the way how the Greek city states once fought each other, in spite of the fact that they are of the same stock. By uniting them based on race and by gradually striving towards this generic White identity, just like it happened with Greece, brother wars will cease to be.
The break-up of Czechoslovakia is an example of a failed nation-state, a nation artificially created after WWI, a nation the Slovaks always felt stifled their national identity by making them subordinate to the Czechs. The Slovaks tried to break away under Hitler’s umbrella, and they were forced back after WWII. Yes, Czechoslovakia was a multi-ethnic nation-state, but so are, in many ways, other European nations as well. There are internal differences within Germany, Italy, Spain, even France. The UK would have to break up into its constituent nations. There’s Belgium of course. There’s nothing in general pan-European theory that would prevent local sovereignty of whatever nations or regions that wish to express their own identity, whether these be currently existing nations or smaller fractions thereof. In fact, such fractionation would only be realistically stable long term within the confined of a greater overarching structure; otherwise, the micro-states would be ineffectively viable on the world stage. Ironically enough, a pan-European macro-state would be more effective at promoting the establishment of smaller regional identities than would be a system of completely separate atomized nation states each attempting to maximize their territory, status, resources, and region an global influence. Ethnonationalism is therefore self-defeating if what they are really about is allowing ethnic self-expression and ethnic preservation. When the nation state is the largest political entity then it has a vested interest in maximizing its size and influence. It’s not a perfect correlation of course; for example, Spain is in the EU but doesn’t want to give up Catalonia. But the EU is not a fair grouping of equals but a German-dominated authoritarian state with French junior partners. The EU disguises German national power interests; in this case, it is understandable that the Spaniards do not want to weaken themselves further compared to the German colossus. A true pan-European entity would not let one or two nations dominate the rest.
On the other hand, while the EU in practice is a fraud, in theory, it is a European macro-state, and, again, nations joined voluntarily. The nations of Eastern Europe were ecstatic to join (and not only for the economic benefits; they wanted to “join Europe”). They’ve become disenchanted with the far-left globalist agenda of the EU, but I note that even the ethnonationalist hero Orban does not talk of leaving.
In any case, a European macro-state does not mean that Slovaks have to be subordinate to Czechs, or to anyone else.
America isn’t some kind of rootless place without a distinct identity or place in history. Simply put, the primordial order of what once was, manifested itself again. America didn’t fall like Yugoslavia which was based on Ethic-Slavic identity because it’s fundamental unity was based on race. By providing the White peoples with a national body that commands all aspects of culture, regional styles would be preserved while we would enter the new age of our civilization; the creation of a new culture based on the old (as it happened right here). America served her role as the regathering point for all Europeans and left its mark on human history.
Soon we won’t have the luxury of dividing ourselves based on some minor differences and historical feuds. The tide of color is coming and no one has the power to stop it (yet).
The HBDers welcome the Yellow (or Yellow-Brown) tide of color. That’s what fellows like this don’t realize. Derbyshire’s “measured groveling” to “Rosie” is a feature, not a bug of HBD. Of course, they oppose pan-Europeanism. Divide and conquer.
Only a few of our nations will become beacons of hope for our race and serve as the new regathering points after the colonies. Start focusing not on what thing are, but what they should be. The best way to culturally and linguistically unite Whites is an idea proposed by Ben Klassen, which promoted the use of Latin as a secondary/primary language for all White people. Not only would it help to bring down the barriers that divide us, but it would be perfectly in line with our ancestral European heritage ( considering that the overwhelming majority of White nations once had Latin as one their primary languages, which became the precursor of many of their modern dialects).
WE’VE BEEN IDEOLOGICALLY MARGINALIZED FOR YEARS…
Yes, by the ethnonationalists, ethnic fetishists, Nordicists, Type Is of every stripe. You are wasting your time trying to reason with them. They oppose you and they hate you.
…YET THE ALL EMBRACING SPIRIT OF PAN-EUROPEANISM STILL BURNS STRONG IN THE SOULS OF WHITE NATIONALISTS.
Well, maybe 10% of them – the Type IIs. The Type Is that make up most of the “movement” oppose pan-Europeanism; even the ones who superficially claim to support it are against it. For these latter hypocrites, “Europe” is only that which is north of Vienna and west of Berlin.
EVERY ONE OF US SHOULD SPEAK OUT AND FIGHT FOR WHAT WE BELIEVE IN, NO MATTER HOW “DANGEROUS” OUR “UNREALISTIC SEVERAL PEOPLE WANT IT TO SEEM.
I agree. What we are all about is being prescriptive; if you want merely to be descriptive, we can just talk about the status quo and assume the future will be the same as past and present. True, you can argue that the prescriptive has to be somewhat realistic. But we do have an EU, nations joined voluntarily, and they became disenchanted with it only because of the way the EU is being run, not the idea of the Union itself. So why is pan-Europeanism “unrealistic?” As far as “dangerous” goes, please remember Johnson advocating ethnic cleansing as part of his ethnonationalism. What’s “dangerous” abbot my vision of pan-Europeanism?
History has already proved that what we re trying to achieve is not only feasible, but the right thing to do. Please contemplate on what has been said.
I wish you all nothing but the best.
You are being naïve. They are the enemy.
Now, let’s hear from that enemy, and their crazed accusations:
AndrisPosted July 31, 2019 at 7:24 pm | PermalinkYes, not only I have audacity to call you imperialists but the RIGHT to do so.
I have the right to call you and your kind the murderers of Europe and of the West.
Your Spencer-ite vision…
Is this obsession with Spencer a homoerotic fixation or what? After “Grandiose Nationalist” spends a paragraph mostly attacking the details of Spencer’s “vision” (sic), he’s accused of supporting it. Ethnonationalists are crazed.
…stays the same no matter how you use your mental gymnastics to distance him from yourself.
Clearly distinguishing your ideology from someone else’s is “mental gymnastics.” Very well. Ethnonationalists are far-left anarchists – don’t try to fool us into thinking otherwise with all your mental gymnastics!
Again, today I had to witness flowers on a Soviet Russian monument the same pan-europeans refused to get rid off in fear of offending “our brothers”. Flowers on a monument that celebrated murdering my people, sending children to Siberia in cattle wagons, enslaving us just like their tsarist ancestors did before them.
I have no idea what this moron is talking about. What? Some “Spencer-ite” Duginist types worship Stalin and Soviet Russia? Eurasianists are not pan-Europeanists, you stupid bastard.
We get called fascists for the mere reason some of us don’t speak Russian in our own country.
That’s right! After all, Yockey was an anti-fascist, like me. Idiot.
They play the victim since the 90s. Soviet Union was a Russian nationalist empire, no matter their flag or your mental gymnastics. Russification and oppression never changed.
Psychosis alert! This person is gibbering against his own fantasies. Who is supporting “Russification and oppression?”
I have no doubt you would green light murdering of Ukrainians, Latvians, Estonians, Lithuanians for your ill concieved, romanticised imperialist, revisionist fantasy.
Err…it was the ethnonationalist Johnson who openly endorsed ethnic cleansing of European nations who didn’t play along with his ethnonationalist agenda. See here for a critique, and Johnson’s quotes. All those “Ukrainians, Latvians, Estonians, Lithuanians” had better watch out – the ethnonationalists are coming!
A quote from Johnson exemplifying the peaceful nature of ethnonationalism (emphasis added):
But what would happen if a sovereign European state signed a treaty to host a gigantic Chinese military base? Or if it fell into the hands of plutocrats who started importing cheap non-white labor? Clearly such policies would endanger all of Europe, therefore, it is not just the business of whatever rogue state adopts those policies. What could the rest of Europe do to stop this? Isn’t this why we need a politically unified Europe?
The answer, of course, is what all sovereign states do when they face existential conflicts of interest: they go to war. Other states would be perfectly justified in declaring war against the rogue state, deposing the offending regime, and ethnically cleansing its territory. But then they would set up a new sovereign regime and go home.
Also note the spectacle of these small nations depending on the American empire, NATO, and the EU to protect them from Russia. If you are all so very fiercely independent, then please go it alone and defend yourselves, you hypocrites. Moscow and Beijing will tremble before the pronouncements of mighty Tallinn!
Here is a template for the ethnonationalists. Watch closely!
Or making Croats bare the failures and problems of Serbs, etc.
Or making Southern Europeans bare the failures and problems of the pathologically altruistic, eh?
I am GLAD that you are an international joke without any power, the sheer idiocy of the alt-right “grandiose” imperialists that call the EU equal or worse than USSR or any empire before it when they have no idea what non-Russians went through.
Same with schizophrenics of Christianity that will gladly murder anyone who’s not bowing down to nonexistant god.
It’s more likely for ethnonationalists to be Christians than it is for pan-Europeanists.
You are just a sheltered fool who ignores that ethnonationalism is dangerous only when the nation is imperialistic.
That ethnonationalism always leads to intra-European war “just happens” to work that way throughout history. It’s a coincidence, of course. Was the violent break-up of Yugoslavia caused by “imperialism?” Or do you blame the creation of that nation on pan-European imperialism? That’s really laughable. And let’s forget the 800 lb. Chinese gorilla in the room; after all, Europe encompasses the entire Earth, right? The only problems Europeans have is with Russia, right?
And EVERY imperialist stays an ethnonationalist, no matter your fantasies of white “brotherhood”.
More true than you know. And vice versa. Definitely vice versa.
In the 40s, Finland was a “threat to peaceful Soviet Union” and now Ukraine is “dangerous to peace and safety of peaceful Russians and Russian Federation”. Laughable.
Sanity alert – pan-Europeanists have contempt for Dugin and Spencer. I have no idea what this angry, hate-filled screed is supposed to be about. Get some help.