Does Your Nationalism Suck?

Does Your Nationalism Suck?

Why do we Lose?

Nationalism keeps losing. I'm not just talking about ethnonationalism, with the embarrassing failures of the movement and the widespread frustrations. Civic Nationalism keeps losing. National Bolshevism keeps losing. Southern Nationalism keeps losing. We spent the entirety of the 20^th century watching various factions in the West fail to have any semblance of a coherent nation state which sees its own people as its first (or only) priority. Even in cases like Ireland, the struggle for independence was won – only to see a severe degradation, including open borders and demographic displacement championed by the very people who once fought bravely for their homeland.

Why is this? You might point to the power imbalance, that the world system uses hard power to stop nationalism: all cultural, governmental, and societal institutions are oriented against us. Let's call this Problem A. Ever since the Second World War, nationalism has been the great enemy of today's world order, and both the Western and Soviet powers worked tirelessly to crush it. When the West “won” the cold war, the greatest effort has been taken to prevent any sort of revival of nationalism over all other issues. Problem A ensures that there is no self-adhered principle that the system will not break in order to make sure that nationalism loses. It is public enemy number one precisely because it remains the only threat to the system. So we're the underdogs because of Problem A. Sure.

But to honest with you, I am not convinced that this would be as big of an obstacle to us if nationalists stopped poisoning their own ideologies with the absolute worst motivations, opinions, strategies, and utter delusions. We could have a great amount of success, even if only on the small scale at first, if only we had avoided the problems brought on by toxic personalities and addiction to loss. In other words, nationalism keeps losing because most people's nationalism sucks.

If we want any sort of success, any return to sanity, and any hope for the future, then it will do everyone well to interrogate their motives with this handy questionnaire. If you answer “yes” to any of these questions, your nationalism sucks and you need to rework it. I suggest everyone reading this article have a pen and paper handy; if you disagree with me, write down why, and ask yourself seriously whether the problem is with me or you. I received some constructive criticism (and some not-so-constructive criticism) over my first article on this site; after that, I saw that simply “be poorer” was only telling half of the story and began to write on some practical matters that help build the self and community. I urge everyone to have the same level of introspection.

The Questionnaire: Does My Nationalism Suck?

Question 1: Is my nationalism based on hatred?

Maybe someone is reading this and having a knee-jerk allergic reaction to it. “Hatred is a stupid and made-up term used by the [insert people you hate here] to avoid accountability for their actions! Besides, hatred for the enemy is the flip side of love for one's own people!” But... is that really the case? Let me posit to you that hatred is the dumbest, most time-consuming mindset you can have. It takes away a positive vision for your ideology, makes you repugnant to everyone, and retards your ability to function.

So let's hear an example with Enemy #1.¹ Yes, there is such a thing as Enemy #1 misbehavior. Maybe you're right that there is a massive Enemy #1-ish conspiracy that is subverting the West. So what are you going to do about it? Even with moral considerations aside, we know that warfare isn't the answer because of Problem A: suggest it and you find yourself in jail, enact it and your actions will be used to further oppress your people – at the hands of Enemy #1. Kill someone, and the cops make it plain that you did this as an act of “hate” - and now the government has the cassus belli to act against your people even more. Violence won't work – what will? Political subversion? Have fun trying that one after your infiltrator candidates end up going insane with all the false loyalty and constant hiding. The people who engaged in the long march through the institutions remembered how they got total power; they're not about to allow us to have any, especially not by their methods.

With the first two options out of the way, the answer most nationalists end up having is “redpilling the normies” through podcasts and memes, in the hope of something like either mass awakening or sufficient recruitment to make a movement possible. “Listen to 300 episodes of this podcast and we'll make sure you know exactly why Enemy #1 is BAD and why you need to HATE them.” Maybe this isn't a bad idea if it doesn't exist in a vacuum, but the problem is that it always does. Eventually, once you have sufficiently convinced yourself that yes, you must hate Enemy #1, that is all you will ever talk about. You won't shut up about it. You will think that Enemy #1 is not only the cause of the world's problems, but also the only problem ever.

I am convinced that few people actually do this outside of the outer right. You never hear some Oath Keeper telling you he loves the constitution for the sole reason that he hates monarchs, and you won't hear him talk incessantly about the misbehavior of British royalty. Only among fringe circles have I ever seen someone say “yeah, I started noticing [insert people group here] doing bad stuff, hated them, and then I found myself believing what I do now because of it.”

Hatred makes your nationalism suck. It makes you suck. People who cannot think about or talk about anything other than their hobby-horse Enemy #1 inevitably become cantankerous, one-dimensional, annoying losers. They cannot relate to the common man at all, and usually end up hating the common man as well. I have met so few of this type that have any sort of positive vision (“what does my ideology mean? What does it look like in practice?”), and even then their positive vision generally looks like “once they're all dead and we're in charge, you'll see.” We say that conservatives, especially the Republican Party, exist to lose gracefully; haters lose angrily.

Question 2: am I Edgy for the Sake of Being Edgy?

Well are you? Then your edgy version of nationalism sucks. It might sound like I'm repeating the first question, but this goes a bit deeper. The right has accurately called out virtue signaling for what it is, and regularly takes people down for their shallow, stupid opinions that always amount to “look at how good of a person I am, you should like me more.” But over the course of time edgy signaling replaced it. The normie virtue signals with “I put a black square on my Instagram account to say Black Lives matter.” The edgy-poster signals with “the Holocaust didn't happen... but I wish it did.”

It is one thing to hold an opinion about supposed historical events. It is quite another to loudly proclaim, in the most obnoxious way, whatever you think is the most heinous thing you could say. I'm not questioning the edgy-poster's authenticity, as I am sure many of them have decided to conform their philosophy to whatever ridiculous thing they're saying. I'm questioning whether such an individual will see any success whatsoever.

“Yeah man, I like Nietzsche, there's no such thing as good or evil and only the strongest survive. If my grandma asked me for help getting down the stairs I'd just push her down and steal her food. Just like my foreign policy.” Might be fun to say stuff like this (signaling after all gives people something of a high), but no one will take you seriously. The edgy-poster can tell me that he's a rational actor all he wants and say that his ideas are well-thought out until he's blue in the face, but at the end of the day he's just silly. Go ahead, convince normal people that going full exto is the only way. See where it gets you.

This isn't just regarding policies either. Edgy signaling has caused endless division and infighting on the right as far as it touches aesthetics (see: optics debate), religion, taste in entertainment, etc. It simply isn't productive and if you disagree with me then your nationalism sucks (or you're a fed). Everyone is trying to build a community of like-minded people and get something done for our side; the only ones who will follow after the edgy-poster are the ones who will probably kill him, at least when they find something edgier. Like Islam.

Question 3: am I just a wimp?

Many in our circle came to it through the urgent desire for safety. Our crowd expanded sharply as the European migrant crisis came into the public eye, as FBI crime statistics were published everywhere, and Donald Trump's comments were accurate; “someone's doing the raping.” We were confronted in our forums with compilation videos of [insert racial/ethnic/foreign group here] being violent towards Americans, Trump Supporters, Whites, women, and so forth, and suddenly we got pretty scared. The normal solution offered by the nationalists then was to kick the offending groups out. Pretty reasonable, right?

There is nothing wrong with this notion per se. But there is a point in which it shows a loser mentality, even an implicit weakness. “We have to kick this element out of the nation because the natives like peace” is often code for “this violence demonstrates how weak my people are.” This sentiment is woven into statements for the need for some “nice white country." Look, I get it, no one likes to see a lot of violence, but if your entire opposition to diversity rests on “other races are mean and I want to be far away from the meanies” then you are admitting your nationalism is for limp wristed weaklings.

Nationalists: if you honestly have a problem with the violence you're seeing, then learn to defend yourself, spar often and be ready. “B-b-but they're unfair and they hunt in packs!!!” Then go out in groups. We aren't getting out of this mess any time soon: now is the time to get tough and teach your people to be tough. If you're worried that at some point self-defense is going to be outlawed, then put space in your head that you might go to prison or have to be on the run. Come up with a plan instead of insisting that we have a safe nation right now. Again, Problem A has made it pretty inconceivable that we'll get our way any time soon, and I'm not advocating learning violence in order to go to war with the well-armed and well-funded Clown World, but you must adjust your lifestyle and embrace self-hardening to survive on the street level. Once your have a mannerbund in operation, the first priority you need to have is making sure you have each other's backs -and each other's families' backs as well.

That said, I also believe that having real interactions with people you consider enemies is a good thing. They are human beings as well, not automata of things you don't like. Learn about them through direct interaction, and you will have a better sense of getting around the bad eggs. Who knows, you might even end up making some friends along the way. But prepare for real self-defense. Anything less than preparation for (and acceptance of the fact of) street violence is just wishful thinking.²

Question 4: am I just a picky Liberal?

This is not as large a problem regarding our crowd these days as it used to be, but it is still around. If your conception of nationalism is liberalism but only for your people, your nationalism sucks. When the Pulse nightclub shooting happened, I recall so many people lamenting that these were OUR homosexuals and this FOREIGNER came in and KILLED them – HOW DARE HE? Of course, a year prior we were all complaining about how the Supreme Court's decision to force legalization of gay marriage everywhere was a sign of America's total moral collapse.

It still happens to some extent today. We cry like conservatives at how unconstitutional the left behaves when they have power – soon after complaining about how the Constitution gave our enemies room to destroy the nation. People aren't mad about the progressive mindset – you're just angry that the results of progressivism ended up being what they are today. Again, this isn't as much of a problem as it used to be, but every now and then it crops up as things get worse. I believe it is a sign that we haven't given up a lot of our upbringing in the educational system, or our ideological priors are getting the better of us. Please take a moment to examine them and excise them if needed.

Question 5: am I an all-or-nothing type?

The Black Pill is reserved for those people who expected the world and only got a neighborhood. They expected Donald Trump to give us an ethnostate when instead he just bought us some time. They wanted The Turner Diaries (just as Pierce, who was probably an intelligence or law enforcement asset, would have had it), but got Charlottesville instead. There has been an idolatry of power which supposes that if only we could get total control over the American Leviathan, we could make all our dreams come true. If only we could win complete control over the system, then we could have everything we ever wanted. This is nationalism for losers, precisely because it loses every single time it tries to do this. Again: the people who engaged in the long march through the institutions remembered how they got total power; they're not about to allow us to have any, especially not by their methods. If you demand clear victory at the outset and revolve your entire ideology around getting your way, then your nationalism sucks.

At this point, I fully agree with Borzoi that local power and community mindedness are the way to go. If you can get one of our guys to have some influence over your town or city, then you have achieved an important victory. Do you have friends who will support you if you lose a job? Good, you have one of the biggest needs fulfilled. Our enemies have a nasty habit of destroying themselves; ensure your survival while they go out with a bang, and you'll be able to realize the bigger goals after.

Final Question: do I strive for neurotic purity?

Purity spiraling is for losers and D&C shills. Have a broad circle across the right. Heck, you ought to be friends with the Hoteps, too. Neo-reactionaries might be goofballs at times, but they're good at thinking things over. If anyone on our general side of things, even the libertarians, get some sort of victory, it's best to find some good in how that affects your side. This is not just “don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.” This is “don't be a brat.”

Here's a handy test for getting along with someone politically. Simply ask yourself if you and him share at least half of the broader priorities in your ideology. Closed borders? Non-masochistic education? Silencing the pervert-industrial complex? Ask yourself what your limits are: if you find that you can only hang out with people that agree with you 100% on everything, then you will find yourself a lonely failure.

Conclusion

Ask yourself these questions, and I guarantee you this will provide some clarity on your direction. A lot of these problems have more or less been dealt with by the “movement” at large, but they are also some of the biggest contributors to our failures – and naming them will help our guys prevent further losses. In doing this, we ensure victories in the future.

1That is, whatever minority, nation-state, or political belief you're thinking of right now.

2This will likely be the topic of my next article.