11 Comments

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.

Expand full comment

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.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I think globalism shows what kind of paving-over effect that an imperial monoculture does to the many peoples of the world. Unfortunately the seeds of our current Globalist situation are found in the basic proposition of one race lording over alien races, as a shared culture leads to demands for shared resources without any acceptable moral argument to deny them those spoils.

One could argue enforcing a sort of Helot/Spartan situation into perpetuity or a harsh caste system, but I'd rather just dispense with the slaves and unstable systems of control and instead let other peoples have their sovereignty apart from my own people. A system that is too specific and active-based in its control is a fragile one, whereas passive mechanisms like physical and linguistic separations work wonders for keeping peoples happily apart from each other.

I agree that the powers-that-be want to disrupt the continuing formation of the American Ethnos, as ruling over a heap of ashes is preferable to the tyrant than losing his grip on power. If we can regain a sense of moral certainty that overcomes the pseudo-moralities and cynicisms of modernity, we will have a good chance of ending the disruptions and the disruptors for the foreseeable future. It's a big "if" that tentatively seems more possible by the day however!

Expand full comment

It appears that the "global civilization" is going through a de-complexification process and new stripes of nationalism are popping up every where. The US is going through an imperial transition which will (unfortunately) lead to some type of codified legal serf class. Plebeians, Patricians, and Elites. It'll probably be 30 to 60 years, but at some point a "resident-worker" class will be legally defined. Especially if this (initial) challenge to birthright citizenship is successful.

Expand full comment

The alternative is balkanization at this point. We already have our own ethnic-cultures and ethnogeneses.

Expand full comment

Not to mention, monolinguistics. The reason the British Empire collapsed the second time and especially lost Ireland was because the UKGBNI never tried to assimilate it's own metropole by solely mandating English as a language. Now look at Scotland, Ulster, and Wales. Even England itself has some notable separatist movements (Cornwall and Wessex) because of this.

The Right And Center seem no different, at least the Mainstream Right for sure.

Don't even get me started on how the USA hasn't tried to enforce a monoculture at all, except between the 1870s to 1950s.

Expand full comment

1870 to 1950 was HALF of the run time of the entire United States. It seems likely (with Trumps reforms) that we'll be returning to a monocultural period in the US.

Expand full comment

On Japan’s racial views: that country’s contraction from empire to nation-state followed military defeat, and wasn’t motivated by a fear of racial mixing (e.g., with Australians, whom they planned to conquer). Imperial ideology, from *hakkō ichiu* to ‘Yamato Race as Nucleus,’ also disregarded the racial borders of ‘like-kin.’ They even imported Koreans en masse to the metropole, creating a lasting fifth column.

The ‘membrane’ idea to reap the rewards of foreign interaction without risk is elegant. But it seems unrealistic to ‘take the recipes’ when it comes to something as complex as learning to practice Hinduism while icing out Hindus (not sure if that part was a joke!) When it comes to semiconductor knowledge, important nations are learning that human capital and humans aren’t as easy to separate as one might hope.

Expand full comment

Didn't Japan try to assimilate the Koreans (albeit late in their empire status) by banning the usage of the Korean language?

The U.S. hasn't seriously even been trying to assimilate people, at least not for decades.

Expand full comment

Yeah, 1938 is when Imperial Japanese schools used Japanese language only as a medium, and 1939 is when they gave subjects Japanese names. It wasn’t only Korea though, other territories under IJA control from Taiwan to Manchukuo to South Seas Islands (Guam etc) got the same treatment.

Expand full comment

My favorite part of this is when he called the post-imperial Japanese a collective Kirby 😅. Kirby is OP, especially in the N64 and GameCube Smash Bros.

Expand full comment