Submitted by Will Westcott
On the surface, civic nationalism may seem right-wing. In reality, Civic Nationalism—the belief that a nation is not a people but a set of values—is hostile to the very essence of nationalism.
Civic Nationalism is not Nationalism, it is classical Liberalism. Having borders and a nation is an essential premise of liberal democracy. As Andrew Sullivan wrote in New York Magazine, “[t]he entire concept of a nation whose citizens solely determine its future—the core foundation for any viable democracy at all—is now deemed by many left-liberals to be a function of bigotry. This is the kind of madness that could keep them from power indefinitely.”
His point is simple, liberal democracy needs a nation with borders. Civic nationalism is not opposed to liberalism but essential to its success. Globalism is the radical left-wing of Liberalism while civic nationalism is the conservative “right-wing” of Liberalism. Both ideologies are grounded in the liberal myth of the tabula rasa, where mankind is no more than individual blank slates who can be molded into the perfect society if raised in the right environment and taught the right values.
The meaning of civic nationalism is to save the proposition nation by emphasizing “our shared values” and quelling identity politics that would rip the nation apart into tribalism. As the New York Times stated, the American experiment is “the idea that people from all races, ideologies and religious sects would check their hatreds at the door after becoming citizens in our sustaining narrative.”
In contrast, ethnonationalism and racial supranationalism exist on a wholly separate plane of political thought, where history, biology, demography, and hierarchy determine the meaning and destiny of a nation.
Not only does civic nationalism deny the reality of race, it fails under its own premise. What are these “shared values” that unite us—Liberty, Equality, the Rule of Law? Does anyone believe this? Liberty and Equality are contradictory principles, often diametrically opposed. A nation defined by conflicting values is absurd. The logic of the proposition nation implodes under the slightest scrutiny, yet this is what we are told makes America great.
The truth is that “our values” are not liberty or democracy. What really unites America is anti-white animus under the veil of “equality.” White privilege, anti-racism, diversity, multiculturalism, open borders, these are the values that define America according to our ruling elite.
If you don’t believe in such values, then you’re a “racist” and “un-American.” When our ruling elite calls us “un-American,” they are embracing true civic nationalism. If you do not believe in the values of the proposition nation, you are perforce no longer a citizen of the nation.
Wherever the Alt-Right has gone, we are met by the same reaction: Not Welcome (usually accompanied by recitations of “refugees welcome”). These are not mere words, but threats backed up by action. Charlottesville enforced their declaration of “not welcome” by physically removing us from their park and town altogether. We were not Americans in their eyes because we reject the values of their proposition nation. Thus, we could be removed from their city and denied the very human rights of freedom of speech and association they profess to worship.
Such illiberalism is not an aberration. The great irony of liberalism is that it functions illiberally, unable to tolerate the ideological other. It is religious in nature, the proposition nation operates like a theocracy. The foundational values that form the basis of the civic nation become the “civic religion.”
In America, this civic religion has replaced Christianity. Some call it Holocaustianity, given the sacrosanctity and infallibility with which the Holocaust is revered, and the fact that any pro-white sentiment is deemed barred by the implication that it will inexorably lead to thegaschamber. In this civic religion, whites are born with the original sin of racism for which they must atone by handing over their country to nonwhites. Hitler is our Satan, Nazis our demons, and MLK our Jesus, redeeming us from our white supremacy. Professors, politicians, and intellectuals are nothing more than monks, bishops, and priests enforcing the orthodoxy. Universities are their churches and virtue signaling is their sacred rite.
Like most universal dogmas, Liberalism is a religion that cannot accept the other. Convinced of its own moral supremacy, anyone that rejects liberalism and the propositional ideal is therefore an evil heretic to be purged of their sin. Reason, open debate, tolerance, these are ostensibly the enlightenment values of liberalism. The “intolerant left” is a meme, however, because liberalism is anything but tolerant or open to debate with its enemies. Dissenters are traitors to the faith, and thus the country itself. Racists are reprobates who must be burned at the stake through Media campaigns of doxing and demonization. There can be no reasoned debate with that which is immoral, it must be destroyed. Tony Hovater is a prime example. The faithful went apoplectic over his New York Times profile, enraged that he was not dehumanized and painted as a vile subhuman for his heresy. Zealots then had him fired from his job and forced from his home.
To espouse white identity is to be a “racist” and “un-American,” which is why “un-American” and “not our values” appear in tandem when the establishment attacks us. This is the meaning of civic nationalism. It upholds the propositional ideal of our civic religion, which is predicated on the downfall of our people.
Ethnic nationalism and civic nationalism are oceans apart. They only appear to coincide because policies that benefit whites are most often the policies that are best for the nation. In comparison to the nation dissolving globalism of neoliberalism, civic nationalism’s desire to preserve the nation-state appears “right-wing,” but fundamentally it is just another liberal ideology advancing our dispossession.
Case in point is the Alt-Lite. These civic nationalists were supposed to bridge the gap between Conservatism and the Alt-Right. Instead, the Alt-Lite acts as a final barrier to us. We are “un-American” to the Alt-lite in the same way the Left sees us. The chasm between ethnonationalism and civic nationalism is unbridgeable, we repudiate the very civic religion they seek to save.
MAGA is merely a tent revival. An attempt at reawakening “our values” to overcome and transcend the racial divide tearing America part. Yet, no religion has ever overcome racial differences. Churches remain strongly segregated along race and culture. Our civic religion is no different. MAGA is hated by nonwhites because the values of deporting illegal immigrants, building a wall, and banning Muslims are “racist.” Trump’s attempt to shift the national narrative and re-write our civic religion away from anti-white animus towards colorblind patriotism and individualism is vehemently opposed by the reigning orthodoxy. Trump’s reformation has been met by shouts of “crucify, him.”
Trump is not their President in the same way we are “un-American.” Even if Trump were to succeed in his reformation (redefining our values towards colorblind meritocracy), our demographic doom would not change.
Ultimately, civic nationalism is untenable and will give way to tribalism. Real nationalism can only be centered around race, family, and kinship. Without it, there is no such thing as a nation. America is a people, not a set of values. We are Europeans, descendants of the people who settled and pioneered the North American continent. That is what it means to be an American. Everyone else is just visiting.
nolvadex for sale usa I started clomid without having a period.
PMID 29096046 Free PMC article. siphene buy no prescription
online cialis Online pharmacies that The cost per dosage is listed every 24h
Compare to up to 450 at urgent care clinics generic cialis 20mg The main thing people want to pay in money orders is to cover delivery costs, however you do have to be very careful and pay attention to a few things
I agree that shared values alone don’t cut it, but we also have to look at the non-racial aspects of culture, such as language, religion, music, dress, food, entertainment, etc. I think it’s clear that people are not “tabula rasa”, but a mix of nature and nurture, so to speak. In US Army SF we had a lot of racial diversity because it was good to have folks who mix in with the locals overseas, but all of us were hardcore patriots. Perhaps those were the exceptions, but I can’t help thinking that my teammates, my brothers in arms, would be excluded under ethno-nationalism, and that bothers me.
Have you noticed the bearded New Yorker in the right hand front row is giddy beyond belief. This is England ??????? and something has to be done about it.
Conservatism, inc., aren’t conservative in the traditional sense since they haven’t conserved any vestiges of the old America and have lost every battle in the culture wars except the second amendment. They are conservative progressives who basically want everything the anti-white left does, just in smaller, more manageable doses and with less of an impact to the budget deficit.
Separation of church and state is crap as our state religion is cultural Marxism and people and institutions are forced to observe its tents or have their lives and reputations destroyed. White nationalists and alt-righters are treated as heretics and dhimmis and this was on display in CVille.
Someone needs to break the news to the Jew York Times that whites have checked their hatreds at the door but that non-whites have not a fact which all loony lefty media outlets ignore or gloss over.
This is what civic nationalism includes: http://www.breitbart.com/california/2017/12/02/amazon-delivery-woman-defecates-customers-front-yard/
Third World people = Third World standards = open defecation is the norm. This includes no hand-washing and cross contamination of your packages.
Another reason you should always wash your hands after opening your packages.
See, that´s the problem with insufficient analysis: you don´t come to the correct conclusions. To wit:
the liberal is NOT in the wrong with his intolerance against intolerance: it is exactly the correct logical conclusion for a system of tolerance. It´s the liberal social contract: everybody is accepted who subscribes to the social contract of accepting everybody else as his equal.
White Nationalists do not accept everybody else as their equal, therefore they are fully rightfully excluded from a system that is based on the social contract of tolerance.
So it´s stupid to whine about how mean liberals are that they exclude us and are so intolerant while they claim to be tolerant. The correct reaction is: YES WE ARE INTOLERANT and YES we thus do not subscribe to your social contract.
Our systems are indeed incompatible: THAT´S the correct analysis. The result is naturally: separation. Exactly what we want: racial separation. Greg Johnson´s Racial Divorce.
Equally, this harping on how liberals are a church, and the running through the whole analogy, is just zilch, it helps nothing to blame them to being a cult or something: they simply have their principles and stick with them, you gain nothing in trying to turn that against them.
Failing to do all that correct analysis also leads to failing to see the one pivotal point: that IT´S ONLY WHITES who don´t fit in! ONLY THE WHITE is by nature racist and must therefore be exterminated so that the multiracial harmony can become possible. But that says… and it is THEM who say it: WHITES ARE SUPERIOR. Here, I said it. We are superior. We are not equal to the muds. The muds want to be around us, we don´t want to be around the muds. A mud marries UP with a White, a White marries DOWN with a mud. A mud IMPROVES his genetics with a White, a White CORRUPTS his genetics with a mud. Everybody knows it (and nobody has the courage to say it…. for reasons of politeness! no less, talk about White scrupulosity in the wake of our racial demise!). We are in fact intolerant, and the muds are in fact tolerant: they are tolerant to improving their genetics: wow. How magnanimous. But things are NOT symmetrical, and therefore, we do NOT want to reciproke: BECAUSE IT´S NOT EQUAL !
So, failing to do the correct analysis, failing to concede that the liberal ideology rightfully, i.e. ideologically consistently, excludes Whites and puts us down for extermination, means to fail to take the occasion to point out this most basic of all conditions!: that the races are NOT equal, and that there is a racial hierarchy and that it is universally understood that Whites are superior in the racial hierarchy: not by our own assessment but explicitely by the assessment of the non-whites!
Yeah. So why should civic nationalism only be served up roast goat au jus to the proles?
In the J-Zone, every Victim with a J-certified grievance entitlement gets the gravy train.
Time for Americans of White European heritage to serve our own roast. Make mine coq au vin blanc.
Civic nationalism is one employed sheep, a jewish butcher, and a rainbow coalition of welfare wolves, deciding what to have for dinner.
This article doesn’t account for the realities of the current political situation. The United States of America is extremely unlikely to become a white ethnostate, or even a series of different ethnostate. The best approach would be to allow for freedom of association, like Jared Taylor whites, and remove the gibs that incentivize low IQ people to breed, like Charles Murray wants. But of course, you’d call this “civic nationalism,” which is WAY less realistic than your LARP.
Nail on the head! It’s the Multicult!
I think Mr. Law needs to revisit his idea that “[e]veryone else is just visiting.”
Mr. Law’s thesis is that the U.S., in its essence, is a White European nation. It doesn’t help his argument, however, to discount everyone else’s efforts as helpful, but not essential. That’s a distortion of history.
Note: I checked the authorship of article before writing comment. But I erred. The article is apparently not by Mr. Law. It’s an anonymous guest post.
Left/Right is a meaningless distinction at this point. They just represent two arms of the same insidious monster that is destroying us all. If your goal isn’t slaying the beast (and that goes for you flag waving buffoons as well) then you are part of the problem… As Commander Rockwell said “To hell with the right wing.”
Wasn’t the whole Left/Right spectrum formed during the French Revolution? If so, this is heavily outdated and must be replaced with something more consistent for our times. Maybe we can formulate something else after this Ideological Cold War?
Yes. The aristocratic reactionaries in favour of the Monarchy and against Liberal Democracy sat to the Right, and the Liberals/Commoners sat to the Left. That is where it comes from, and yes it’s long been irrelevant. Today the Right are classical liberals and the Left are progressive liberals. I’m against all forms of liberalism, and am in favour of a revolutionary third position to destroy and replace the decayed liberalism.
‘Classical liberalism’ is NOT civic nationalism. AnCap autism is still required to sort out the differences in ideologies and nomenclature. Not knowing basic differences is as foolish as not knowing the differences between your enemies, which is required if you are to defeat them or not be defeated by them.
This is where Alex Jones is still relevant. ‘Federal Reserve’ is just like saying ‘Federal Jones,’ as he used to say. It is just a name. It is neither federal nor private, just as ‘liberalism’ is neither tolerant nor intolerant. It is what the majority makes of it, not some inevitable evolution. Even fascism became a force for good and bad depending on who exerted it.
The Early Republic of this country was as close to textbook classical liberalism as has ever been fathomed or will ever be achieved IRL, just as the USSR was with communism. So we can just read the Federalist Papers or the Constitution itself to know that the Founding Fathers were not only not SJWs or these liminal facts-on-the-ground civic nationalists…They were the original Alt-Right. The original white nationalists. The original conspiracy theorists. The original patriarchs. For God’s sake…they even owned nonwhite slaves and safeguarded every other white man to as well.
Is the ‘Nation of Islam’ actual Islam? -No. This entire ideology is based on a stereotypical, pseudo-intellectual imprisoned Negro parsing through the most basic themes of a foreign radical culture, and then lazily superimposing black supremacist blasphemy upon the most basic tenets, without actually understanding any deeper knowledge of Islam beyond that. Blacks and Muslims are still enemies of the white race, but that does not change the fact that they are very different groups naturally opposed to each other, which is quintessential knowledge if you are to understand this Popular Front against whites.
Blindly calling this virus plaguing Western Civilization ‘liberalism’ is retarded because Classical Liberalism CREATED this country. It is CULTURAL MARXISM, which is corporate and not synonymous with ‘liberalism,’ that is destroying it. These people do not believe in free-markets, free-speech, borders, isolationism/noninterventionism or free-association, as underscored by laissez-faire capitalism. They believe in corporatist collusions like Google, Youtube, Paypal and all these other monopolistic cartel censorships, as well as cosigning Military-Industrial Complex adventurism/warmongering to make the world safe for Zionism, as long as they also benefit from it.
These mongrel civic-nationalist Kekistanis have never even advocated classical liberalism or ‘muh free markets’ or free association or even ‘hate speech’ (free speech). They are just the newest incarnation of neoconservatism 2.0 with (((Ben Shapiro))) as their new Ronald Reagan parroting meaningless shibboleths like ‘muh tax cuts’ as an ode to their Jewish overlords.
Remember that slavery, segregation, secessionism and revolution are derived from ‘free association’ (Classical liberalism), which these multiculturalists oppose as ‘anti-American’. Lol
Cultural Marxism/Freudian-Marxism has bled into the Right-Wing under the slipstream of (((Neoconservatism))), and has entirely clouded our political dialogue since at last 1980 under Reaganism (‘special relationship’/non-treaty with Israel), but officially began in earnest under the Eisenhower administration with Brown V. Board of Education.
Neoconservatism basically means three things bundled together: ZIONISM (Greater Israel geopolitics), ‘NEOLIBERALISM’ (privatizing/enabling de facto national utilities into the hands of likeminded oligarchs) and GRADUALISM (slow erosion of traditionalism into multiculturalism via Cultural Marxism: same-sex marriage, feminism, open-border/amnesty, affirmative action, political-correctness etc).
We have all watched without even having our mouths agape (as we should have) over the last two decades as (((Kristol, Krauthammer etc))) have gradually surrendered these political footballs one-by-one, to where every election they threatened to bolt BACK to the Democratic Party (where they emerged in the 1970s from their Trotskyite heyday), if somebody like Rand Paul, Ron Paul or Pat Buchanan won the Republican nomination…until they finally followed through when Trump won and they unashamedly chose to ‘Stand With Her’ the very next day.
(((They))) did this so gradually that nobody could be bothered to connect the dots because they looked like stopgaps compared to their J-Left ‘adversaries.’ This was all planned and they knew this day was coming, just not in 2016 because they did not foresee Trump. They expected any sort of nationalism to be politically impotent by that point when these neocon locusts fulfilled their duty and retreated back to radical leftism entirely with the rest of their ethnic compatriots of Judeo-Bolshevism.
It was never about conserving ‘muh freedoms,’ preserving anachronisms, reactionary restoration or that coveted Christian theocracy as hoped for by hoodwinked dispensationalist Evangelicals. It was just an expiry placeholder for Judaism to corrode its rightist adversary into socio-poltical, cultural and economic irrelevance.
So this J-Right cover, where Israel is the beacon of diversity that nonwhite Shabbos Goyim all swear fealty/pay homage, is the cloak they hide under in order to be classified as ‘based’ Third Worlders in an increasingly hostile white society. They still nihilistically want white genocide in order to force a regression-to-the-mean genetics upon their white hosts like their mixed parentage forced upon themselves.
‘Civic Nationalism’ flag-waving derived from the waning days of the British/French Empires, where all these pathetic rogue Redcoats/French FOREIGN Legions will fight a war over a rock called the Falklands with white Argentina and occupy white Northern Ireland, but will not evict its own colored colonial backwash choking its own capital and pimping its own children, in order to maintain this rump legacy of yesteryear.
They stood side-by-side with their imperial subjects on the Western Front against nationalist Germans and again in North Africa. These nonwhite veterans who helped occupy Germany are the antecedents of the ‘Alt-Lite’ cucks and their Kekestani frogmen.
They exist SOLELY as Praetorian Guards for Jewish Neo-Cohens to help co-opt the unwashed white masses and force them to act as unwitting sentries to police their own brethren into cuckoldry, and then cobble together the shards of defeated white nationalist countries (newly demographic pluralities) with ‘facts-on-the-ground’ multiculturalism, so that these dispossessed whites can be hoodwinked into only praying and pining for a ‘German economic miracle’ of higher standards of living (consumerism), where they are then forced to give credence to this happenstance diversity, rather than building an everyday utopia under white homogeneity.
(((They))) already did this many times before and called it ‘West Germany,’ ‘Silesia,’ ‘The Ruhr’ and ‘Alsace-Lorraine’ or anything else to justify dismembering white solidarity any chance it ascends into unification and beyond.
But they know they need this dispossessed white secularity in order to buttress this unnatural narrative of coexistence just long enough until a demographic plurality legislatively eclipses any white nationalist-populism and prevents it from democratically reversing diversity from its white homeland.
So when you see these ‘based’ Happas, these mulattos with cool memes or any other (((moderating elements))), just know they are essentially the ‘Rhineland bastards’ born to the miscegenation of indigenous German harlots and their nonwhite colonial occupiers under the Versailles Treaty, hoping to make their surroundings more suitable to their un-relatable existence. Their white cuckold pals like Gavin McInnes are another story.
Kudos on the rant but still the issue of liberalism remains a thorn in our side. Our blood calls for a God Emperor.
Good discussion by Vincent Law. Civic nationalism has a tiny kernel of truth in that an individual or a small group of outsiders may be able to live in a new country, learn the language and customs, shed a previous identity and truly become part of a new (to them) nation. (E.g., A few non-Japanese people do become Japanese citizens every year.) But the phenomenon absolutely does not scale up. Any group big enough to have a reasonable sized community will either never assimilate or the assimilation will be so slow as to be meaningless. In fact, at that point, assimilation will vie with transformation as the goal.
Vincent’s comparing the idea of civic nationalism to a religion is a view I also share. Once heretics are identified as heretics, no further debate is possible–the heresy must be suppressed, lest it contaminate the minds of the faithful. I would add only that the civic nationalist religion includes the Cult of Negro Veneration. Earlier this week Nancy Pelosi referred to John Conyors as an “Icon;” what could be more illustrative? I’m surprised that their havn’t been sightings of a risen Martin Luther King. Give it time.
Civic Nationalism is Noahidism.
The Rabbi ….. Holy Man ……..Fingering the memory of the Dead.
The 888 246 PoPPies amount to 1948 by the usual method.
Our England. Jews using others, usually innocents, as proxies for the purpose of mocking the Dead.
I’m so glad to see this topic. I’m taking a free class online about city planning. I’m to read a short bit of information about it here https://courses.edx.org/courses/course-v1:ETHx+FC-02x+2T2016/courseware/2f5bd69c69514a6cbaf9c4ed713a9aa9/fc6e70eea79b4aafb8f605ee3be03a39/?child=first
I’m hoping everyone can see this page and download the reading. (((They))) are planning future cities. The race mixing will happen big time in this future.. I’d love for the intellects of the alt right to read this and comment.
Just for those not wanting to sign in
The PDF here
Their suggested book here
Your link doesn’t work, but I assume you’re talking about Google’s plan to build “smart cities” around the world?
The caption below your top photo should read: WE’RE THE NEW MAJORITY NOW, SUCKERS! This should serve as a warning for all white nations.
“Every race, color and creed” as Alex Jones enjoys saying.
I think we’re at the point now, being late in the game, where this idea of “gateway politics” is nonsense. They’re acting more like Judases than gateways, because they constantly counter-signal the Alt Right and signal to their Jewish masters, that while BLM and Antifa are bad, bad, bad, whites should NEVER work for their racial interests. That’s the worst thing possible, because identity politics is the problem!
Identity politics works great for Jews! Israel is a Jewish state, even though it’s also democratic and capitalist.
Israel to black migrants: “self-deport or go to prison.”
BTW, Walmart is selling BLM and Antifa clothing in case you didn’t know.
““Every race, color and creed” as Alex Jones enjoys saying.”
More and more people are seeing the absurdity in that. Some will not say it publicly, but they do.
Conservatives have this idea that they need to prove to everyone how noble and virtuous they are. This includes trying ever so hard to prove to the commies on the left that they are not “racists”
After the Kate Steinle verdict, I saw people on Breitbart doing everything they could to avoid talking about race. They wanted to talk about a “war on women” or how liberals hate guns, although that verdict had nothing to do with either. It’s absurd to watch, but some of them know they are just full of crap. They just don’t want to state to truth. They want virtue signal and try to appease the commie left even though that has never worked and never will.
Deep down, many of those people spouting the “Every race, color and creed” crap are starting to feel in their bones that something is very wrong with that concept and the Kate Steinle case will be another step towards more whites waking up. Beyond the simple verdict of this case the continuin fallout of it(open season on whites in California) will serve to wake even more people up.
We’re still way behind, and while the change is slow, our side is doing nothing but gaining more people who see the truth and will admit.
Amazing Image! London is changing so fast! I see my good friend Chief Rabbi Mirvis in that picture with Sadiq Khan.
Just scraping it off the top of my neocortex without any coffee…..
Civic Nationalism reeks of the infamous Godelian loophole of MUH CONSTITUTION!!!!
There just aren’t any constraints on Civic Nationalism “Conservatism”….for Civic Nationalism only retains an anemic trace of our past which is MUH CONSTITUTION!!!
HE’S A REAL NOWHERE MAN
LIVING IN A NOWHERE LAND…
“civic nationalism’s desire to preserve the nation-state appears “right-wing””
Don’t let the leftists or Alt-Liters re-define basic English. A “Nation-State” is by definition a racially/ethnically defined political organization. “Civic-nationalists” are trying to maintain a purely civic-state that governs over multiple nations within it.
The etymological roots of the word “nation” explicitly relate to natural categories and relationships. To illustrate, possibly the most natural and organic of relationships is that of mother and child, and thus we have the word “nativity” to describe the scene of Christ’s birth. “Nature”, “native”, “naturopath”, “innate”, “nascent”, “renaissance”, all are built from the same root-suffix “nat”, and in one way or another relate to the meaning of birth, inborn, or relating to natural categories.
This is common knowledge and any etymological dictionary will prove as such (https://www.etymonline.com/word/nation).
Leftists have been, consciously or unconsciously, trying to redefine this word because it is proof in and of itself that the world as we currently know it is the end result of the histories of competing nation states. It’s not that the first Americans just so happened to be white revolutionaries and explorers, but rather that white revolutionaries and explorers defined America itself.
Great working definition:
“Ethnonationalism and racial supranationalism exist on a wholly separate plane of political thought, where history, biology, demography, and hierarchy determine the meaning and destiny of a nation.”
Of course cult of pluralism leads to ethnocracy, we’re seeing that play out now.
I speak about this idea in public forums and the typical left’s respond (or even CN’s) is “race is pseudoscience! your whole ideology is based on pseudoscience”
Now, Im sure everyone has their responses to this bullshit. Regardless of how dumb it is for them to say, instead of arguing race is real (which is a perfectly reasonable recourse), I find myself asking “If that’s pseudoscience, what is Civic Nationalism…how does that fit the Pseudoscience Litmus test? How does what you believe fit into Science?”
Of course that a political ideology has to pass a (made up, goal post game) “science barrier” to be considered moral, is kind of silly in and of itself. But, if we’re comparing apples to apples, ours has more of a natural basis than anything they’re offering.
I haven’t had a good response to that yet. Im sure there is one, as the argument always seems to be created for any talking point. But, as of yet, I haven’t seen it.
The picture you found is great to reveal the CN outcome (I often show the meme of “at least I have muh constitution” and its a chapel of all Africans and one blonde boy” – Im sure you’ve seen it.
Then, I follow up with the concept of Diversity + Proximity = Conflict with the website with all the sources listed to back it up. (which people are free to google).
Now, the website says “D + P = War” , I changed it to Conflict because I think that’s more inclusive of all the situations that fit into the problem of D + P.
I havent seen it talked aobu here (not that it hasn’t been), but I often remind people that a White Ethnostate isn’t necessarily “right or left”, as a group of whites can be very intellectually diverse. That is not anathema to a Ethnostate. Of course, many political ideologies dont fall neatly into that contrived left-right paradigm any how…but that seems like a lot to dump on CN cultists all at once.
Can you clarify – why does Civic Nationalism have to pass a science test? It should be as simple as ‘a group of people have a good thing going and want to keep it that way’, no?
You say you ask that instead of dislodging the ‘no race’ thing. Maybe you’re constrained by your position but, I doubt that that fiddling with words would be as memorable to /me/ and dislodging of the equalist ideology, as pointing out the many proofs of race’s existence and significance (“yes it’s hard to define where a hill begins, but that doesn’t mean that ‘hill’ isn’t a useful concept”, DNA knows your race, IQ spread etc etc).
Oh, and Vince, for once I approve of this article. I know, you care 🙂
Sorry for the confusion. I lament no edit function here, and since it’s just a comment section Im not exactly putting my “all” into it…
Having said that, what I mean is as a response. As a response to “your ideology is based on pseudoscience” – so, if that’s the new goal post “Its not scientific!” Then, if we turn around and apply that to CN, it has none.
I agree with your second statement, certainly race does exist….scientifically. 🙂 Even if like you said, the edges are somewhat blurred/mixed. No one sincerely argues they cannot at all understand what a European is.
Now, if you’re arguing “keep a good thing going”, we have a bit of a dilemma dont we? As, how much of the “good thing” is actually due to ethnic diversity, or as a result of ethnic homogeneity…or frankly, from the mind of Europeans.
Whereas, we can stipulate the resources and defensive paradise of having two oceans, of the USA are not bound by race, eg. “because of White people the US is bountiful and hard physically hard to attack”, however, the use of such resources in the magnificent way they have been used, is certainly due to European design.
As Spencer likes to rejoin “How can you deny that!?” 🙂
I see you thought I might be defending Civic Nationalism, asking why it had to pass a science test. No, I just didn’t understand. It’s still an emotionally weak argument, to me. But you do you.
The US was a good thing before ethnic diversity (at least while it was diversity among only whites), so I think it’s safe to say it’s not /due/ to race differences. Blacks did play a role in the south before machinery – they tolerated malaria and heat better than whites, and cotton was an important American export so give them their due, I think we got a kick from them. And Jews in the sciences. And Chinese in building the railroads. Wtf I’m a Civic Nationalist now! Nah but I think we can acknowledge their help while taking into account that maybe we would have been delayed, but wouldn’t have been stopped, without the others.
I see. Again its a reactionary retort to a ill formed liberal attack.
Re: Blacks were integral, I would argue that “Blacks did play a role in the south before machinery” yes, but was unnecessary and that darn cotton would have been picked somehow regardless…and not recognizing the actual economic regression that the economic policy of slavery presented. Ingenuity of Europeans would have found a way. People have wrote more on this….google it.
Of course, any imagined economic benefit is counter-balanced and then some with destructive result of the Civil War. One could argue ”
one white life not worth freeing one slave” – also many argue that a war wasn’t required to abolish slavery.
Jews can well help wherever they are. Again, whites did and do just fine in that regard as well. The argument is “at what cost” do we pay for the sake of Jewish inventors? Let them invent in Israel. We still would benefit, right? Because their so magnanimous.