by Brett Stevens on March 28, 2019

You can feel a charge in the air. We are in the midst of one of those nodal points of history where paradigms change, and then as people update their thinking, everything else follows in changing.

During the last century, democracy won against hierarchy and nationalism. The world shifted further Left, drugged on human rights and socialist-style entitlements subsidies. It seemed that everything was known and in its final state.

Then, something happened just after the turn of the millennium. The problems that people had ignored in the 1990s came to fruition, and as a new generation dawned, people realized that Leftist Boomers from the 1960s had made Millennials into zombie neo-Communists.

At the same time, the diversity trap exploded. With our first black president, we got race riots every month; Europe experienced a crime wave from its third world immigration. Diverse groups fought with one another, showing that “white racism” was not the problem.

Simultaneously, all of those entitlements programs made states broke. The USA ran up a record debt, China used this as a control method, and it became clear that demand-side economics would not work for anyone.

With those crises, others revealed themselves. Humans were using too much and and too many resources, so pollution and ecocide finally became issues, stepping out from behind the shadow of the now-discredited “climate change” symbolic issue.

As a result, people are rejecting the ideas that were previously considered solid truths that everyone knew and believed. They are distrustful of democracy, equality, and diversity and even more, are skeptical of our beliefs going back to The Enlightenment.™

Next stop, we will even reconsider the Magna Carta, and maybe look to the time before that, when religious wars brought on by the introduction of Christianity, the rise of the middle classes, and our loss of direction once we succeeded Rome will come under fire.

Those who are vested in the system now — the “elites” who make their money directly or indirectly as the result of Leftist liberal democratic government and its wealth redistribution agenda — are fighting hard to control us so that they can hold on to the old order.

We should consider how this works out. Facebook, for example, makes its money because most people work do-nothing jobs and spend most of the day scrolling through social media, Amazon, Wikipedia, and Netflix.

Those make-work jobs are created by government regulations and market distortions. Without affirmative action, jobs would be competitive. Without union protections, there would be less of a move to separate each job into tiny discreet roles. Many spend most of their days on government paperwork or activities to work within laws and regulations.

These elites fear a change in the system. Every time they get given a mandate, such as when the panicked herd reacts to something like the NZ FPS mosque massacre, they get busy making new laws that hope to “transform” society by making it impossible to go back to the way things were.

As of today, Facebook has banned white nationalism and white separatism from its platform:

Today we’re announcing a ban on praise, support and representation of white nationalism and white separatism on Facebook and Instagram, which we’ll start enforcing next week. Our policies have long prohibited hateful treatment of people based on characteristics such as race, ethnicity or religion — and that has always included white supremacy. We didn’t originally apply the same rationale to expressions of white nationalism and white separatism because we were thinking about broader concepts of nationalism and separatism — things like American pride and Basque separatism, which are an important part of people’s identity. But over the past three months our conversations with members of civil society and academics who are experts in race relations around the world have confirmed that white nationalism and white separatism cannot be meaningfully separated from white supremacy and organized hate groups.

Zuckerbeg, et al. are now simply tossing around definitions. White supremacy, white nationalism, and white separatism simply mean people of European descent who do not want to be forced to have third world people among them.

White supremacy used to mean white people who wanted to rule the world and dominate lesser races, but since we have seen that formerly white nations want to rule the world anyway, and since basically every ethnic group thinks it is supreme, this term has lost meaning.

White nationalism refers to the movement in mixed-white countries (US, UK) for an end to diversity. They want an ethnostate, but they mean a racial state, in which only white people live. This is both a response to the disaster of diversity and a sensible idea.

White separatism effectively means the same thing: white people wanting no diversity.

Over the years, I have criticized white nationalism because it acts like an ideology. “White” is not an ethnic group; it is a race. Whites are widely varied, with Southern/Irish, Eastern, and Western European groups being genetically distinct.

Nationalism makes sense when you say “Israel for the Jews,” “Japan for the Japanese,” or “Germany for the Germans.” It makes less sense when you try to forge a national identity out of mixed white groups.

In America, “white” traditionally meant Western European, as it did in our first immigration laws. Later this was expanded to include Southern/Irish and Eastern Europeans.

Claiming to have “white nationalism” makes about as much sense as “civic nationalism.” Both are attempts to turn a natural and organic thing, tribalism, into an ideology, or an explanation of how the world should be that mobilizes all activity around that.

With white nationalism, you have the idea of a society based around race. While this is better than multi-racial diversity, it still misses the point that unity must be achieved through culture, which is ethnic more than racial.

Civic nationalism simply restates the dominant ideology of our time, which is that we are all equal and united by “values.” What are those values? Laws, politics, and economics, if you listen to the civic nationalists. Those are not values, however, but simply a defense of the existing system.

You cannot form a society out of white nationalism any more than you can form it out of loyalty to a form of government. You can form a society which is nationalistic, and in fact the only healthy societies are that way. You need more than that however.

A civilization must have its heritage, the culture that goes with that, leadership, standards of behavior and customs, and an economic system. White nationalism addresses the heritage issue but leaves everything up in the air, so most “white nationalists” become basically racist Democrats. They want socialism-style entitlements and large government, but those are race-based so for them, it is OK.

In other words, these terms mean nothing by themselves and are simply being used as tokens for the fact that we want an end to religious, ethnic, and racial diversity. If people were honest, they would simply say that they are anti-diversity activists.

If Facebook were honest, it would admit that social media is simply trying to distract from its mounting legal problems:

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) charged Facebook Inc on Thursday with violating the Fair Housing Act, alleging that the company’s targeted advertising discriminated on the basis of race and color. The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing and related services, which includes online advertisements, based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability, or familial status.

Basically, Facebook got screwed here. Everyone wants to live with a group like them. For this reason, they instinctively want to be able to see which communities are white, and when selling or renting to avoid changing the character of their area.

Funny how this news hit the wires at the same time that Facebook announced that it was banning white nationalism and white separatism. The Zuckerstaff know that with all the neurotic useful idiots out there, a headline about banning “the bad guys” will drive out the other story.

Social media is under fire from all sides because it started to act like a publisher instead of a forum. Publishers regulate their content to make a point; forums allow people to post just about anything and host it because they support their users.

When you are a forum, you have low responsibility for the content that your users post. When you start editing, censoring, or curating that content, suddenly that changes, because you are using other people as your mouthpiece.

This started when certain large search engines wanted to make their results consumer-friendly instead of accurate. That means leaving out all the offensive stuff and subbing in as much commercial advertising for normie activities as possible.

When Google started demanding that sites which use its advertising, the dominant platform for selling ads on the internet, remove content that might be “racist” because “racism” is offensive and in the bourgeois notion bad for business, everyone else did the same.

That trickled down to Twitter and Facebook, who are — if you look at their business model instead of their most well-known activities — trying to run competing ad platforms to what Google has.

Ironically, it was the start of this slippery slope down the path of censorship, control, and manipulation that caused social media to face the legal problems that it does today. The world’s tiniest violin plays a sad song (just kidding, it’s halfway through a Cardi B cover).

Where does this leave us?

First, we should figure out who “us” is. In my view, “us” means all of us on the dissident Right, which means those who have crossed the Buckley line and finally admitted that to be Right means that you oppose diversity, equality, and democracy (D.E.a.D.).

We are anti-egalitarians. We do not believe in equality of the social classes, since that requires socialism, Marxism, the entitlement state, or something like those. We do not believe in sexual equality, usually called “feminism” and “LGBT rights,” because it destroys the standards of behavior needed to have thriving families. We reject religious, ethnic, and racial equality — diversity and globalism — as well because those destroy the ability of civilizations to have unity through heritage, culture, and customs including religious faith.

Now that we know who we are, we can work around the needs of Facebook to virtue signal in order to conceal its entrapment by civil rights law which demands that all real estate be sold to all ethnic groups.

Instead of worrying about white nationalism and white separatism (or even white supremacy) we should say loudly and proudly:

I support nationalism and separation for all human tribes.

Our goal after all is not white nationalism, but white nationalisms, or the ability for every type of European to go its own way and eject outsiders, foreigners, and cultural outliers from its group. Doing so is required for unity and culture.

When other groups get this ability, it naturally extends to us, but even more, creates a worldwide trend of groups withdrawing and enforcing ethnic unity. That in turn reduces the appeal of others coming here.

The “open borders for Israel” meme is stupid and rewards resentment instead of sound policy. We want nationalism for Israel, for Catalan, for Japan, and for every other place. We are on the same side, even if we will be doing so separately.

In the meantime, we have two needs on the internet:

Places to organize Places to recruit

The former is easy. You never do your organizing in public or where forces sympathetic to your enemies can see what you are doing. Even more, you can use encrypted email anywhere so whoever sees your internet connection will have no idea what you are doing. Our future involves using mailing lists much as Leftists have done successfully for decades.

“Recruiting” means something different for the Right than the Left. They want to brainwash people with propaganda; we offer a way of life outside of the Leftist mind-lock which commands that all things be done to increase equality, which is the only moral good, or those things must be opposed and destroyed.

This means that we do well in public by sharing articles from mainstream news sites which show the failures of diversity, equality, and meritocracy, and explaining in a few words why this is so. This works well on social media because the format naturally lends itself to news posting.

Going underground for this second part would be dumb. Many want us to retreat to specialized services, defending what they think is the “free market” ability for companies to regulate what is on their platform, but forgetting that this regulation comes from organized Leftism and does not apply to commons spaces.

I have in the past said that it is time to abandon social media and in general, this statement is true. Social media, Wikipedia, and advertiser-friendly Google killed the internet. However, since social media is hugely influential, we cannot abandon it now, even if our ultimate goal is a decentralized internet.

If we go underground, we become another niche subculture. These small withdrawn groups are like the guys who get raped in prison: they have given up on ever having strength. We want to take over the world and eject the Leftists to Venezuela, not retreat into little cliques to discuss how sad and bad everything has become.

While it does not look like victory, this Facebook censorship plays in our favor. It gets rid of the armchair activists who will bleat out symbolism but never do the work of finding support for it, which is what really convinces people to join us.

Tags: censorship, facebook, nationalism, organizing, white nationalism, white separatism, white supremacy

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.