Refuting Walt Bismarck's White Globalism
Walt Right vs Dissident Right
Walt Bismarck threw down the gauntlet again on the topic of White Nationalism. One may have imagined he had said his piece on the matter at length in his breakout article Why I’m no longer a White Nationalist back in March 2024. But he stayed the course of his performative-provocations with the Milleniyule audience this past December.
Dissent Right met Walt-Right once more in volatile fashion, and now has boiled over into his article-of-subject: White Nationalism is Anti-White.
A boldly-garish sentiment shot across the bow, and one guaranteed to raise the hackles of many “Movement” sorts. It’s the kind of Anon-tier article Bismarck has built his Substack on, and one that is delightfully taunting for my response. And I’m certainly not one to let an opportunity to champion the right-instincts of my Nationalist compatriots with a touch more articulation than the usual fare.
Origin of Anti-White Nationalism
Walt Bismarck’s article thesis is to paraphrase: White Nationalism runs counter to White interests and values, namely in that White Nationalism proposes “a Racial Isolationism that seeks to insulate White people from external pressures and influence”.
Now this particular focal point was spurred on by the huff-and-puff he received during the second half of his Milleniyule appearance. The peanut gallery was rather intrigued during the first half of the conversation where Bismarck focused on the positive ability of his Tortuga Society to enrich its membership through Job Stacking.
Currently, conceptions of wealth-building among Nationalists are generally limited to dirt-farming, donation-begging, and t-shirt peddling. Anything more financially complicated than going innawoods to economize pinecones runs the risk of being considered “Jewish” by the salty-earth sorts who have little professional experience beyond manual labor. Limited experience limits imagination one might say, but this psychological defense is understandable and even necessary as I will later explain.
Bismarck’s proposition of coordinated Job Stacking therefore fits into a much-needed niche in Nationalist discourse. The practical and easily-graspable nature of Job Stacking as a significant and somewhat-quick wealth builder is something that even the gruggest of grugs can appreciate:
Job Stacking
Get remote job
Finish faster than full-time
Get second remote job
Finish in spare time
Collect multiple paychecks
Rinse and repeat as your time, skill, and sanity allow.
The simplicity of the proposition strikes some people as some kind of scam, having never experienced the frequent doldrums of remote work. Yet the strategy checks out for those willing to risk secretly juggling multiple positions. As I outlined in my article The Morality of Job Stacking, there are even good arguments on the moral case of defending the practice – so long as you don’t drop the balls you’re juggling.
Bismarck was reeling them in – practical optimism, workable financial solutions, and glimmering potentialities for an under-served section of the Nationalist audience. It was going so well that the host MillenialWoes even marveled at how promising and positive it all was. You could practically hear the gears turning in Dissident heads at what Bismarck was laying out for them.
And then, one by one, Bismarck grasped ALL the third-rails of White Nationalist discourse! Urging direct emulation of Jew and Jeet, aspiring towards morally-questionable tactics, promoting race-mixing, even hating on Hobbits to a largely British audience – oh the conflagration in the chat was a dazzling trainwreck to witness in real-time!
That response repeated the pushback he’d received from his articles criticizing White Nationalism and its adherents. The likes of Gordon Kahl and myself articulated as much with slightly more patience than our apoplectic compatriots, but the general raw nerves are shared by most Nationalists. And Bismarck, caught in this quicksand, pushed back all the harder into its grasp.
I for one appreciate how this episode has produced so rich an article from Bismarck challenging a few sacred cows in Nationalist discourse. We now have a further articulation about Bismarck’s proposed “White Globalism”, a notion that with a few tweaks can be restored to a far superior and mutually-satisfying notion of American Nationalism – such as what I ascribe to, of course. Naturally my ideas are the best ideas, you see!
So with the table set, lets get stuck-in, shall we?
Inevitable Minority Status
“[…] my desire to cultivate a new kind of political Whiteness—one that isn’t seen as hateful (or even outside the bounds of mainstream politics) and can help wypipo peacefully pursue our collective interests in a transactional accommodation with other races as we gradually adjust to our now-inevitable minority status. It goes without saying that his is an entirely fair and reasonable impulse, and that only a hysterical and dissolute freak could see anything objectionable in it.”
-Walt Bismarck
Defeatist phrases like “inevitable minority status” and this inherently Retreatist mentality towards wheeling-and-dealing with racial replacements is a too-common mewling among Nationalists. These mentalities must be shamed out of those capable of grasping anything of this brass-tacks discourse.
There is nothing inevitable about the racial composition of America. Today’s crisis was built from decades of cultural and political subversion, and it can be undone with the application of clever and effectual Will. No fatalism will do in the great game of power.
Most of the peoples trapped in the Communist hellscape behind the Iron Curtain believed that it was an invincible system, right up until the Soviet’s sudden end. Indestructible. Eternal. Inevitable.
Virtually all victims of post-totalitarianism believed so, save for those like Czech radical Vaclac Havel. In his essay The Power of the Powerless, he noted how these kinds of increasingly reality-disconnected regimes trap their populace under a sort of socially-imposed shell, forcing the people to reinforce the system’s terror onto themselves and their countrymen.
But the more total the system becomes in its pseudo-moralities and suppression, the more vulnerable it becomes to even the smallest form of dissent. A single crack in the increasingly absurd system can spark a cascading failure that uproots the entire power structure in a sudden, spectacular cataclysm. As the joke goes:
“How did you go bankrupt?”
Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.
-Ernst Hemingway
In Vaclac Havel’s Czechoslovakia case, it was the arrest of a rock band for criticizing the State that spurred the 77 Charter and mass dissent. Barely over 15 years later, Havel was elected President of his country as Soviet control finally dissolved. Small cracks in big tyrannies can quickly add up.
As for ethnic-trend reversals, the case of Kyrgyzstan is a useful example. After the native Kyrgyz were systematically ethnically replaced to falling minority status by the Soviet Union, they bounced back to over 77% in less than 30 years once reasserting control over their country, and its still climbing. Need I even cite Spain’s Reconquista beginning at so miserable a point of 200 men holed up in the mountains in Moorish Spain, and ending with the reconquest of the entire Iberian Peninsula?
So no, there is nothing “inevitable” about ethnic replacement. Will and tenacity makes inevitable the impossible. White civilization is a testament to that fact, as well as its inverse.
That all being said, Bismarck’s more-reasonable position here is that Whites should have some kind of interaction with other races. After all, a globe-spanning network of influence necessitated by technology will invariably put us into contact with, if not uncomfortable dependence on, other peoples. This is undeniable, and so long as industrial society and humanity remains unchanged, total isolation will be not just undesirable but an immoral dereliction of duty for Whites.
But what is the preferable kind of relationship Whites should have with other races? That is the Golden Question on which the whole matter of Nationalism and Imperialism find their greatest divergence, and a topic we will soon return to.
Nation as Greater Family
Bismarck loudly trumpets Imperialism, wherein one Nation of people politically rules over disparate others under the same State apparatus. This contrasts with the fundamental premise of Nationalism, that States are best developed around, by, and for a single, closely-related People.
Bismarck brusquely dismisses the Nationalistic argument of Nation (and later race) being larger encapsulations of the same unconditional devotion one has to their family. Truth is he doesn’t even like his family, a fact he emphasizes with both bold AND italics – so you know he’s quite adamant about that! His love must be conditionally earned by those following Bismarck’s Rule of Cool, more or less.
Sure, the familial allusion rings a bit hollow when you find your blood-relatives to be insufferable. But none of that negates the biological truth of duty towards one’s kith and kin. So now I’m going to pull a Jordan Peterson here and tell you all about how humans are like Hermit Crabs.
Hermit Crabs move into the vacant shells of other creatures in order to protect themselves from predators. But not just any shell will do. Different Hermit Crab species can be highly particular about the size, shape, and material they will accept for their borrowed carapaces. More difficult still is that their continued growth forces them to regularly swap for bigger, better shells.
All that shell-searching and testing takes a lot of time and energy, which they have to get right lest they risk being gobbled up. However, Hermit Crabs will gather up to form a swap meet of sorts, lining up to inherit the discarded shell of an older relative. Rather than go to all the effort of personally finding a brand new suitable shell, the Hermit Crabs rely on the “tastes” of their kin to do all of the testing and delivery for them. Because they are so similar genetically, their needs and lifestyles are virtually as interchangeable as the shells they inhabit.
By having a close-knit population of highly genetically-related individuals gathering up the same kinds of critical resources that specifically suit their general tastes, ALL the participating Hermit Crabs more readily find shells to live in – increasing overall survival at a much lower risk and energetic cost.
Humans are hardly different. The civilization built by your close relatives is going to trend towards your personal tastes and preferences more than those of completely alien people. By living in such a society built by, for, and of your own, you reduce your energetic costs of translating and interpreting the choices around you and free up that energy to get on with other, more complex social matters.
As put forth far more beautifully by some of the lines from Rudyard Kipling’s poem The Stranger:
The men of my own stock
They may do ill or well,
But they tell the lies I am wonted to,
They are used to the lies I tell.
And we do not need interpreters
When we go to buy and sell.
-Rudyard Kipling
And that truth weaves through all the Rule of Cool examples Bismarck references. Why do we White men tend to adore the Alexandrian conquests? The Roman legions? The cathedrals of Europe? And generally adore them more than we do, say, the Mongol’s Golden Horde, the Zulu impi ya masosha, or the mosques of the Middle East?
Because Alexander, the Romans, and the Cathedral-makers were peoples much like ourselves, driven to embark on adventures that sang to their racial souls. And we, being close descendants of those peoples, are inspired by much the same things they were. It constitutes the shape of our souls, and that shape is not interchangeable with other peoples in this world. It what makes us, and all peoples, special unto themselves.
Oh, but I am not a Nationalist loathe to opine about what makes Whites special, as Bismarck asserted in his article. Which brings us to Bismarck’s next position:
Whites: The Horizon-Seekers
“[…] to properly actualize the White man’s best qualities you really need some kind of outlet for exploration or conquest.”
-Walt Bismark
Bismarck first notes of White exceptionalism is that we often express a strong desire for exploration and/or conquest. This is a point I wholly agree with. Unlike the ossified spiritualism of Asia wishing for Nirvanic oblivion or Africans never dreaming of exploring beyond the sea-shore, Whites have a long history as Horizon-Seekers.
Obviously this is true in a physical sense. To go a-viking means to go adventuring, and that whole northern-people was named after their tendency to just go a-Viking at the drop of a hat. The Age of Exploration was not done by Asians or Middle Easterners despite their technological and intellectual capacities, but Europeans. Now the Romantic among us look to the stars and yearn to touch the divinity our ancestors saw among the constellations. Other races just don’t have the same kind or extent of Horizon-seeking urge as Whites.
But the Horizon is more than just the physical. For as much as certain Apollonian Nationalists out there like to reference Faustian Civilization in reference to conquest and exploration, Faust’s racially-familiar craving was intellectual and spiritual more than physical. Faust sought to know everything, and to expand on the very reaches of human knowledge and understanding.
It’s a drive so uniquely fundamental that it produces a special kind of terror in us. Icarus flying towards the sun in tragic abandon, the Oedipal horror of the inextricable quest for Truth, Knights errant plunging into the darkest monster dens, and even the Lovecraftian lore of soul-shattering revelations of encountering the Unknowable. Whites appreciate these terrors because they play on our instinctual draw towards unknown Horizons.
Spiritual revelation. Bodily mastery. Technological superiority. Literary encapsulation. Aesthetic ascension. Landed cultivation. Love. All these endeavors are pursued by many men, but few races pursue them so vigorously and obsessively as Whites. To appreciate only the outward and physical facet is to miss out on the whole unique gem of the White psyche.
Even those tired-Teuton Hobbits that Bismarck so despises form the solid backbone of White civilization. Indeed those Cathedral-builders were not pirates and raiders but humble peasant volunteers who indulged in the equivalent of his time’s sportsball when not humbly venerating God and tilling the fields.
It is because we have this powerful urge in many of us, like Cincinnatus, to humbly plow our own farms and answer the glorious call of history only when we absolutely must, that Whites are not obligate slavers of, nor kowtowing serfs to, other races. There is honor in humble cottages and pretty soils, whose inaudacious glory lies in the wind’s quiet whispers through wheatfields and the thumping of happy children rushing across clean-swept wood floors.
I doubt Bismarck would disagree much with this assessment, once reminded of the ways White man reaches out into the world and into his own soul. But his assertion that we have never been inward-looking as a race stands in stark contrast to the reality of the peoples who obsess over microcosms and minor differences in spiritual and intellectual opinion to the point of putting each other to the sword. Navel-gazing is in fact one of the greater flaws among capable Whites today!
Speaking of vain-admiration, that’s another flaw Bismarck kindly demonstrated in this section: He assumes when Blacks talk about “dem crazy wypipo” climbing mountains and shieeeet that they are expressing an underlying layer of admiration and respect.
Oh no, they literally just think you’re insane.
Now, crazy gets a certain kind of deference than can be easily mistaken for respect or admiration. But it’s the respect and admiration one has for an unstable landslide, or a sleeping bear. We can do certain things that align with what Blacks do generally find admirable – ostentation, haughtiness, and of course violence. But climbing mountains or venturing into the wilderness are not among them. Horizons mean nothing to them as a people, just as their pimp-suits and bling and exaggerated manner remind us of little else except clowns.
More importantly, Bismarck goes on to make the following claim:
“But this requirement isn’t especially compatible with White Nationalism, which tends to entail a very rigid isolationism. Most WNs—particularly those hailing from our interior regions—will instinctively reject overseas adventures, and maintain that empire is by necessity a waste of blood and treasure.”
-Walt Bismarck
Again we return to the crux of his thesis: Sclerotic Isolationism versus Virile Imperialism. Bismarck repeatedly asserts that White Nationalists want a hermitage country where all non-Whites are kicked out and the gates shut like Willy Wonka’s factory. Absolute self-reliance, racially purified societies, and spewing out blessings to the world from afar. It probably has a lot of t-shirt salesmen scratching out a living innawoods too given that vision’s main purveyors.
This wagon-circling may be only the natural impulse of White Nationalists scourged their whole lives by globalist multiculturalism. But that instinct hones in on the right concerns, and the answers thereof that Bismarck misses in his too-simplified assessment of their drive. Namely, there is a grand difference between Integrating and Interfacing that hasn’t been appreciated in his considerations, and it plays a vital distinction in his Pluralist Chauvinism section soon to come.
A Brutal Aside
But first, a brief moment about Bismarck’s interstitial section on the special Brutality of Whites. This was a weaker point, maybe something of a filler-answer when challenged with the, “What makes Whites special?” bombard. It tends to shell-shock most White advocates, really.
The stuff about other races being not as creative in mass-slaughter as Whites, or that it’s just to contrast against the barbarities of Blacks in White societies, was fairly well challenged and put down in the comments by others. I’ll save you all the reiteration by just saying: Whites certainly don’t have a monopoly on creative violence in world history.
Now, it is true that White Nationalists assert over and over their peaceful non-violence. Any hunted sort will say whatever is necessary to avoid the tyrant’s whip. Not just the tyranny of the ever-hungry federal glowies, but the social tyranny that castigates any White advocating for his race as the most-monstrous and dangerous kind of human being.
The more nuanced answer is that violence is expensive and morally hazardous, and White Nationalists are very poor in cash and manpower. Leftists can literally afford to lay out living speedbumps along highways and raid construction projects with bombs – they have the dysgenic-sociopath market cornered! Nationalists conversely get arrested and fired for throwing out literature regularly. The wiser among them therefore know that the kind of huff-and-puff violence rhetoric prone to online discourse has a trajectory roughly towards either a prison cell or a suspiciously-Federal inferno.
Some White Nationalists like to lean into the Scary White Man perception, giving rise to what could be called No Optics Activists who go straight for the cultural jugular. Aggressive Roman salutes from burglar-like balaclavas, bellowing creative variations of “nigger” at hecklers, and waving giant swastikas around every which way. There’s a whole fascinating psychology there, but they too appreciate the impact of Scary White Man and tend to get a ton of free attention for their verbal aggression.
But more normally the far more harrowing fantasies of violence come from your garden-variety Conservative, not most Nationalists. Ropes and trucks and trees and field dressings fill their vivid, idle fantasies… It is almost always the harmless prattle of consummate moral-losers who couldn’t even conserve a sandwich from a begging dog. A sound and a fury, signifying nothing. They just want to grill – and you must never get between a White man and his spices!
The force that serious Nationalists tend to espouse behind closed doors is generally bloodless. Mass deportations, trials for treason, exiles to desert islands. Legality is always emphasized over lethality. If pressed to more Romantic violence talk, it is not usually spoken about in terms of slaughter or massacre, but as crusade – brutal as necessary to the guilty, but noble in quality and measure. Odysseus dealing with the suitors defiling his home, or a certain Vlad making lawn ornaments out of violent invaders. Those kind of flavors.
So no, the serious Nationalists are really not afraid of violence, just prudent about expressing the whole matter.
The Pluralist Man’s Burden
Now back to Bismarck’s unique conception of Virile Imperialism with his Pluralist Chauvinism: To rule over dark-skinned peoples while also calling them niggers.
The word “nigger” is the greatest shibboleth of our age, a word that only truly inwardly-liberated Whites can say without experiencing moral panic. To imagine an empire of such liberated souls, where our racial rivals are cowed beneath our boots and lashed to our great Juggernaut pulling White civilization forward into glorious prosperity, is certainly a contrast to our current debasement as back-breakingly tolerant keepers of all the world’s scum and beggars.
In its more positive sense, this sentiment arises from the wish to restore a true sense of racial pride in Whites. Certain races more or less naturally have this – the warped superiority complexes of Blacks or the unblinking hubris of Indians are decent examples. In Whites this requires a more complex Moral Confidence, a psycho-spiritual faith in the righteousness of our convictions. It is our need to be “good”, that is to be emulating the Divine Plan and ways of our God(s), that allows Whites to subdue and employ even our bestial urges towards superhuman designs.
It is our greatest strength as a race, and our greatest weakness. A weakness that, I am afraid to say, is still being exploited even in Bismarck’s largely liberated mind. And I say this because no one has yet so earnestly and succinctly expressed support of the White Man’s Burden than Bismarck did in these bold lines:
“White boys will always be the main character. […] And at the end of the day it’s our job to protect them [non-Whites]. Because in truth there never was a real threat to our position. […] You can’t kill Superman.”
-Walt Bismarck
In this belief lies the festering core of the blinding moral cancer that has rotted out the soul of the White race. Appropriately enough, Rudyard Kipling glowingly coined the term that would bring The Stranger to every White civilization’s doorstep. It is the marriage between a racial hubris with the urge for nature stewardship that spawns this cancerous racial paternalism we call the White Man’s Burden.
Whites afflicted with this moral disease fundamentally believe that the White man’s divine purpose is to uplift all these lesser non-Whites from their pathetic ignorance into rightful “civilization” – our civilization. White civilization. And by bringing these helpless savages into our enlightenment and splendors, they will fall at our feet in worshipful praise and gratitude towards our righteousness, having become spiritually White themselves.
These are the glimmering delusions of Whites throughout eons, glutted on so poisoned a prosperity brought about during more enlightened and faithful times, that we seek the ultimate trophy of racial apotheosis by means of trans-racial Imperium. But it is a poisoned chalice, a glorious lie predicated on a fundamental hubris and misapprehension of what we really are and our rightful place in relation to other peoples.
It is, as my readers may sense, a subject too vast to expand on in this cursory essay.
However, it is enough to bring us back to the Golden Question: What is the preferable kind of relationship Whites should have with other races? Bismarck answers with with Global Integration. I answer this with National Interfacing.
Bismarck argues for a “certain level” of racial disharmony throughout White civilization to spur on a competition he believes leads to vigorous, vital White civilization. Like an early-stage Imperialist he believes that by racial pride and inherent meritocratic superiority, the White race will always end up on top of any hierarchy as naturally as cream floating to the top of milk.
To back this up he cites the Romans in their best times were, indeed, unshakably self-assured against the barbarian nations and races they crushed beneath their legions and lashed to their great twin-lived empire. He does not talk of the days of the waning empire when the Romans, at last effete and fat with Imperially-induced moral degeneracy, were conquered by the very barbarians they still, even to the end, believed could never truly harm them.
He cites the various dubious advantages of introducing racial diversity among the American populace, many of which bring about the same kind of empire-destroying weaknesses that are natural consequences of Integrating other races:
Taking advantage of gullible and submissive East Asiatics denies self-reliance, eventually rendering you dependent on those you’ve tricked.
Bringing Hispanics to fight the Blacks, and Muslims to bully the Jews, is to propose the Little Old Lady Who Swallowed A Fly scheme for fixing society’s racial disharmony problems. Spoiler: She explodes in the end.
Inviting in Hindus to rehabilitate our spirituality is like bringing in Mexicans to cook us tacos: We don’t need the cook, we just need a glance at the recipes.
In the end he calls his whole program White Globalism, a name which has about the same appeal as the name National Socialism has to Conservatives - Knee-jerk repulsion. Audacious sure, but we hate Globalism. Globalism economically, morally, and spiritually disgusts the Nationalist. Globalism is the great, dull, worldwide Brownification of all of humanity, and the dream of tyrants and slavers the world-over.
White Globalism is dead on arrival. But National Interfacing has always worked for virtually everyone who has practiced it.
National Interfacing
Even Bismarck hints at the far-superior solution of National Interfacing even as he expounded on his Pluralist Chauvinism. He mentioned the Roman’s alacrity in pillaging ideas from Greeks and Gauls and Carthaginians and virtually everyone else. They wove the mantel of the Western Canon that has blessed every civilization that has donned it with the power to conquer worlds.
It even was the story of Japan, our honoraryans of the Far East. What ended the vigorously-isolationist Tokugawa Period in Japan was the beginning of the Meiji Era (1868 – 1912). This era marked one of the most impressive displays of properly-done cultural exchanges the world has ever seen.
Tokugawa (or Edo) Japan sealed itself off from the world nearly completely, a feverish defense against European domination as it teetered on the edge of being chopped up like all their neighbors. It was an epitome of the Sclerotic Isolationist Bismarck rightly noted, and while not culturally dead it was certainly getting there from holding its breath for so long.
Yet in a 50-year time span beginning in the Meiji Era, this rigid backwater transformed itself into an industrial-grade civilization powerful enough to outright defeat a European power in post-Napoleonic warfare.
They did this by relaxing specific parts of their absolute-isolationist policy and sent scholars and diplomats to the West to bring back the greatest insights that led Europeans to world-spanning greatness.
Their diplomats returned laden with Western knowledge, and they immediately put it to work. They updated their legal codes in reflection of the French Napoleonic Codes. They learned how to industrialize from the British fathers of the Industrial Revolution. And they even adopted the American school system, back when it was rightly considered the best educational system in all the world.
This was an objective process, carried out by Japanese envoys and scholars witnessing the whole of Western civilization from a 3rd-party perspective. What they brought back to Japan completely revolutionized their entire civilization within a generation, without losing their national character. It was successful to the point that it later took a World War and virtually all of America’s sprawling might to put those crazy Nips back into the box from which they suddenly sprang.
That is real civilization power. But how did they do it? Did those envoys and diplomats throw open the borders and import millions of German technicians, British soldiers, French chefs, and American teachers to “boost the GDP” and “stay competitive”? Hell no! The Japanese were and still are hardcore race realists, and they don’t mince words about their disdain for virtually all other humans on this planet. “Gaijin Go Home” might as well be the motto of Nippon, as it well should be for us all in our respective countries.
No, they didn’t import the “best and brightest” to become the competitive powerhouse that they have ever-since been. They didn’t try to inject racial contaminants from Europe into their society no matter how delicious their pancakes tasted or how skilled their shipwrights were. Instead, the Japanese culturally and intellectually Interfaced with Europe, digested what they learned, and rebuilt the best parts after their own image.
They essentially sucked up the Western Canon mantel and turned it into a fitting hat. Like Kirby.
This is National Interfacing. You don’t integrate foreign peoples. You digest foreign ideas, then reshape them after the fashion of your National soul.
Cultures. Perspectives. Philosophies. To isolate oneself completely from learning about racially divergent peoples is a recipe for disaster. On that point Bismarck and I agree against the more blundering elements of Nationalist discourse. For while you look away from exotic ideas and stare at your civilizational navel, stagnation eventually sets in. The barbarians will howl at your increasingly decrepit gates, and one day those gates will open by rot or neglect. Regular infusions of fresh ideas are as essential to Great Civilization peoples as salt and spices are to a person’s diet – you won’t die on bread alone, but you might come to wish for death for want of a little flavor.
What is absolutely vital in successful cultural exchange is that it is always our minds, of our own near-kin people, that do the digesting. As with the Hermit Crabs fashioning perfect shells for themselves to then exchange among their similarly-inclined kin, so too do humans need to fashion strange ideas and cultures into innovations suitable for their kin. There is nothing more natural and fundamental to cultural-formation than this.
We pour the world into the vessels of our souls, and find it takes on the pleasing shape of ourselves.
-Norman Eckart
Gobbling up foreigners themselves, particularly incompatible racial foreigners, guarantees civic indigestion. Whatever benefits there are to African cultural exchange are obliterated by the mutually-felt misery of having to live beside and under the sway of such fundamentally alien people. Even the Japanese, whom I hold a dear liking for, can not achieve their racial destiny so long as they are injected directly into our societies – and we cannot achieve ours without trampling over theirs.
This is the blood-brain barrier of human civilization, through which only select ideas and artifacts must be allowed to pass while their human-originators are kept largely separate and sovereign - lest we introduce antigens that destroy our entire body politic. Whatever benefits there are to letting our brains be directly washed in whatever the blood carries is outweighed by the fatal consequences of such a hemorrhage.
Multi-racial empires break that blood-brain barrier by default. The upper-caste may assert it as domination, but call Integration whatever you will – you bring into the body politic, and into the very nervous-system of their Nation, foreign bodies. In due time, whether centuries or a few short decades, the qualities that make that conquering civilization great, born from that specific people united by their shared blood and souls, will dissolve in a house divided against itself, its divergent souls destined to war with each other until they are conquered in turn.
Every racially-mixed empire dies the same death. Sooner or later, the great people who built it with unquestioning racial pride lose themselves to the curse of prosperity and degenerate. They rip out from the civilizational garden the fertilizing traditions of their forefathers, to plant slave-foreigners bearing trinkets and baubles. And when their effete sickness runs its course and the wealth dries up, the barbarians within the gates feast on a bewildered corpse of a people who forgot themselves and their posterity in the Imperial fever-dream.
That is the Fate of Empires. And it is a fate any people must avoid at all costs.
Like I said Bismarck, we don’t need an empire to strive towards the Horizon and achieve the glory and prosperity we both crave. As a Nationalist I believe that the Nation-State is the greatest vehicle currently possible for achieving the destiny of my people, and by extension I believe that all peoples of this world must be free to pursue their own destinies and not be lorded over by others - especially those racially alien to themselves.
We will befriend some, war with others, and struggle as all peoples have always done. But in that struggle there is life and the promise of glory and beauty and striving towards our many Horizons. That is why I am an American Nationalist and proud to be fighting for my emergent Nation against the forgetful oblivion of multicultural imperialism.
Dissents with the Dissidents
And so we’ve come round circle to the final part, the irksome grain of sand around which formed this Bismarckian pearl – Bismarck’s message to the Dissident-Right. More specifically it’s a message to the peanut gallery that mounted their livechat soapboxes during his Milleniyule interview that inspired him (aka pissed him off) to write at length on this, but potato-tomato you know?
As one sympathetic and in agreement with many of their core beliefs, as well as a fellow ancient anon from the Alt Right days of yore, I feel obliged to lend my voice to their points as they echo recurring themes that are now ubiquitous among Western Nationalists. So I will address Bismarck directly through his five listed dissents with the Dissidents:
1. “You’re broke and verbally untalented.”
Well I’ve been called worse. It’s true, Bismarck talks fast. Very fast. Adderal-fast. Why, it may be because Bismarck has self-admittedly been leaning on the ol think-fast pills a bit too heavily! Seeing that self-improvement and bodily health are high on the list of Nationalist values, the perception of drug abuse, whether a reality or not, is firmly in the category of self-destructive “degenerate” behavior they dislike.
The scornful grunts of, “Jewish” are hardly any different from saying, “gay,” or “stupid” in certain Nationalist circles. Specifically it is a simple expression of dissent towards something reminiscent of a huckster-tricky-degenerate kind of flavor, generally after their goodwill is already spent towards the speaker.
Until you touched their third-rails, they noticed your blitzing speech but were not too put off by it. But after, they groused about it as any mean-girl will nit-pick at details to justify their enmity.
Indeed, many Nationalists are quite impoverished, and to be fair that state is not completely due to Judaic fiscal meddling in many cases. Those who have never known how to make significant money often cast a suspicious eye at anyone who claims to make money in ways arcane and unknown to themselves. Once they disliked you, they just lumped your whole pitch into their “Jewish Tricks” mental bucket.
And verbally untalented? Well not everyone with an opinion worth having has a silver tongue. Verbal dexterity carries with it that “Jewish” flavor because, and this might surprise you, Jews culturally pride themselves on cunning wordplay. Just because one might not be able stand toe-to-toe against the verbally adroit hardly means that their beliefs are wrong. And if that is the case, the grug-grunt generally will do.
2. “At this point accusing me of fraud is straightforwardly just libel.”
This is just an extension of the prior financial ignorance of your average impoverished Nationalist. When they are presented with a sharp, fast-talker promising a route to get-rich-(somewhat)-quick, it is only natural to suspect there being some kind of catch or angle coming at their expense. Most people only know about pyramid and Ponzi schemes, and so they try to fit your Tortuga into that box.
And why do they want to stuff it into that box? Because they came to dislike you. And in that dislike their charitableness dissipated, and with it their willingness to think things through did as well.
3. “The DR’s anti-commercial impulse is pretentious and hugely self-limiting […] and proof you have zero organizational skills.”
I can say from personal experience that organizational skills are in short supply in Nationalism. As is a keen sense of professionalism in these most dire of matters. Not absent, but less common than they need to be and should be among a bunch of self-admitted adults.
That being said, there is hardly an anti-commercial impulse among Nationalists. Even in the same Milleniyule conference there was Hearthfire Radio describing their Pagan commercial network, repeated mentions of the wonderful pulp-fiction Bizarchives publishing house, Aarvoll’s Return to Homeland project building a whole community around a for-profit school, and more. All were received with great interest and overall support.
Talk of business-networking is a hotly-enjoyed topic among Nationalists, with only the sense of “Grifting” – morally insincere profiteering on Nationalistic beliefs - being in contention. But no one is inherently against commercial endeavors – so long as they understand the angle.
Will2Rise sells Active Club t-shirts. Even the lowliest grug in Nationalism understands what their angle is. Selling t-shirts to fund Active Clubs. That’s how and why they make money. Haven’t I told you already Nationalists love t-shirt sales?
For Tortuga, the answer of your angle remained a bit hazy. Those paying attention know you make money predominantly from a club entrance fee, and later on optional services like consulting, resume help, etc. Later you intend to make revenues by directly landing people jobs and taking a fee for that service.
No multi-level marketing. No Ponzi payouts. Your pockets are staying remarkably lean if indeed it was a scam!
But simply put, once the dislike crept in, peanut-gallery people stopped listening for clarification and instead waited for nits to pick. Combined with some of their general ignorance of what Job Stacking proposes and how Tortuga assists, it was inevitable that some people would grumble about Jewish-flavored scams.
4. “One reason Jews are rich […]”
Even now, the third-rails sing out their siren’s call to you! This self-promotion point has the same answer as above, but this little contrarian morsel quoted is a great example of how the dislike crept in.
The Walt Right audience well understands the wisdom of Sun Tzu as applied to racial contests:
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
-Sun Tzu
Dissident Right people know this too, however some let emotions interfere when it comes to discussions of how the “getting to know them” part goes. You treated the topic of Jews with a combination of downplay, admiration, and even boasting of your associations with Jews. Oh boy, that’s a bold way to describe your relations with those the Dissident Right consider existential enemies!
Your Milleniyule audience are fairly knowledgeable about the role Jews play in the destruction of their societies. To downplay that role, to express naked admiration for their trickery and manipulation, and then to say you happily keep a few “good Jews” on hand are all massive red flags for that audience.
You might as well have told a Tolkien-loving Britain, “Fuck Hobbits!” - which you also did, to a similar effect!
That said, one should be able to accept the baby swirling around the bathwater of your point: If Whites wish to out-compete Jews, we have to learn about how Jews achieve success. Maybe some of those techniques, like racial networking, are things we too should practice to gain similar success.
But here’s the hard part – you need to make the moral argument defending your emulated practice. Nationalists are very, very morally-concerned people, to a fault you regularly take umbrage with. They need to feel and believe they are not doing evil, and they tend to hate what they consider underhanded or dishonest tactics.
The tide of opinion in the Milleniyule appearance began to turn on you when you were describing outwitting HR catladies as “blackmailing” them. Blackmail wasn’t really the right word perhaps, but rather petard-hoisting: running them aground on their own anti-White policies. It’s quite the opposite of illegality, its system-gaming. But describing it in “immoral” terms is enough to make Nationalists tense up. They don’t want to become evil or consort with monsters just to get the better of their enemies.
There’s a whole debate here about what constitutes good and evil, the extents to which virility vs ethics must inform virtue, the extents and criteria of mercy, and the treatment of foes as fellows. Power has a certain amount of “sausage-making” to be done after the fashion your namesake described, Bismarck. But to summarize its conclusion: You can sell a Nationalist on becoming Robin Hood, but not George Soros.
5. “It’s ultimately retarded to make the JQ your north star.”
A snicker escapes me every time you try to convince us on this point. You telling Nationalists that Jews are ruthless and manipulative, have backstabbed you personally, and that the good Jews in particular backstabbed you, is endlessly amusing! From the Jewish-Question purveyor’s perspective, you have more reason than most to keep Jews at a long arm’s reach away from anything you hold precious.
Are Jews responsible for all of society’s woes? No, just a surprising majority of the worst ones. Is it possible to mediate between Jews and non-Jews? Perhaps. But is the juice worth the nigh-inevitable sting? Not really, most of the JQ-astute tend to conclude throughout history.
The JQ should no more be the core of one’s worldview than crime statistics or IQ charts. It should be accessory to whatever your worldview is, like any set of highly-elucidating facts that make sense of world events. Which is why it’s so bemusing to me, and aggravating and suspicious to others, to witness you striding again and again onto the same rake and defending it more vigorously every time it thwacks you in the face.
Essentially, it’s not exactly inspiring confidence among the nervous would-be crew when the captain regales them about the backstabby Jew, then brags about the Jews he keeps close behind him. Maybe in your mind it constitutes a certain kind of boldness, like sticking your hand into a lion’s mouth. Most of the JQ-aware just wonder why you are so adamant on feeding yourself to a lion.
For many Nationalists, working with Jews is a danger they want no part of, and if Jews are involved they automatically suspect foul play is, or will soon be, afoot. As a blind heuristic it works out more often than it leads people astray. But we can agree that the instinct to shut one’s mind completely the moment anyone starts exploring the topic of how Jews developed themselves successfully can be unduly stifling.
But, really, it’s better for those unwilling or incapable of sparing with Jewish trickery to just follow the heuristic in the spiritual fashion of Louis IX’s knight in Cluny did. In a world where too many Midwits get bamboozled into destructive beliefs by engaging where they personally shouldn’t, a well-based grug approach has its useful place. That place just isn’t usually at the discussion table though, and grugs should recuse themselves from it and just go find a nice rock.
Hit a Big Brain with a Rock - Seventh Son
Conclusion
To conclude this small book of an essay, I sincerely do enjoy the exploration of this topic. It is becoming more necessary by the day to lead Nationalism towards real, practical routes of wealth-creation and societal infusion. There are many ideas swirling about the “Movement” beyond those either Bismarck or I contended with, some really great and some absolutely retarded. So there will be plenty of new gauntlets to be thrown and chewed on going forward!
Agree or disagree, respectful sparings like this are mighty-White in my book. I appreciate Bismarck’s brazen approaches that give opportunity to spew out a few memes, and I encourage anyone who wants to likewise grind your steel to subscribe to his Substack and engage more on these topics.
Just like in the good ol days after Gamergate!
I think that an multi-ethnic empire CAN work... but it needs to have a strong hierarchy and a monoculture. If we just closed the borders for a couple generations and unified the culture around shared ideals, then one could reasonable expect the creation of an American Ethnos. That said, what's happening right now from the progressives is an attempt to prevent the founding of a strong ethnos and an ethnocentric state therein. The left seeks to create hedonistic hyper-atomized culture and collapse the civilization.
Until recently I figured they had better than 50/50 odds in succeeding.
I'm a big fan of Walt Bismarck and a member of his Tortuga Society but I thought that your rebuttal here not only successfully refuted his original post but was robust to his riposte: https://www.waltbismarck.com/p/in-defense-of-white-globalism
In-group preference is so natural and normal as to be inarticulate, it should not be articulated at all with othering labels, no matter what variant on "nationalist" they may be. It is globalism that is the monstrously unnatural abnormality and is what should be attacked and othered. Forcing a label onto the inherently inarticulate just makes it an object of dialectic with the enemy and thus subject to the enemy's Critical Theory.
I'm half-jewish and thought you both made good points on the JQ.