Spirit of '76

Alternatively, Liberty from the Right.

Libertarians hold an odd position among the Right. For many years, libertarians were the primary metapolitical force forming mainstream RW ideology from beyond the electoral window. They list this spot to the "dissident right" you may encounter on Twitter or elsewhere. Their popularity in America is obviously due to our unique history, especially the events that led to the American national genesis. However, this is also common in Europe. This is why you see many parties like AfD champion smaller government & deregulation.

Regardless, the libertarians have garnered themselves a lot of ill will from the rest of the RW. Over the 2020's, they harshly criticized the rising 'AltRight' due to identity politics, which they supported for everyone except Whites. Many also noticed that this is no time for small government or being against collective action. We collectively agreed that "imagine if the roles were reversed" is idiotic, instead deciding to reverse the roles with the latest administration.

Something important to note is that the pro-White & anti-government movements used to be entirely inseparable. During the years of political violence that hit the US in the 70's to the 80's, there was little difference between an anti-government militia & the original pro-White organizations. A emblematic case is that of Timothy McVeigh, otherwise known as the OKC bomber. McVeigh bombed the FBI headquarters in OKC for all the typical reasons you may hear from libertarian, yet the primary book that inspired him was The Turner Diaries.

Another case is the Weaver family, who bravely stood against the Feds on Ruby Ridge. Despite more soft-hearted libertarians (like Wendigoon, in his otherwise great video on the standoff) trying to sugarcoat the Weavers, they were bonafide White Nationalists. Ms. Weaver followed the pro-White, heretical sect known as Christian Identity. Mr. Weaver had many friends involved with the Aryan Nations & associated groups. The anti-government movement was a White Nationalist movement, moving closely with groups like the NSWPP & KKK.

The modern "just let people enjoy things" type libertarians are just a bastardized emulation. These men were smart enough to know that a small government was only possible in a White ethnostate, just like the Founders knew in 1776. Today's lolberts (if they still exist, I rarely encounter any) aren't able to understand that principles like small government, freedom of expression, & others are inherently White values. These values are alien to other races, they're even alien to the majority of European ethic groups. This is why Irish & Italians (especially the latter) had such hard times assimilating, whereas migrants from Scandinavia, Germany or the Low Countries fit in without issue.

This is also why non-Whites rarely champion these beliefs, and will absolutely use the government against you if you won't bother. Civic & cultural nationalism are meaningless because both these things are downstream of ethnicity, emergent properties of genetics. An example is that Liberia's constitution was almost exactly copied from the United States.'

In truth, the libertarian tendency is inseparable from the Western European & especially the Anglo-Saxon. This tendency is what gave birth to the Magna Carta, the Protestant Reformation, & the American Revolution. Americans have been pushed even further due to our unique history, from the earliest colonists to the Wild West. The call of individualism, a small government, & freedom from society is a genetic instinct. America is a nation defined by pirates, frontiersmen, & cowboys.

The real question is, how do we deal with this? The disdain for libertarianism on the Right isn't just because they're annoying (although they are). It's because they stand in the way. It's like a school child saying "you can't tell me what to do, you're not my mom" when a teacher is trying to get them out of a burning building. The best course of action is simply to ignore them. As of late, this has worked well. Libertarians have lost their political & social influence in the modern landscape, replaced by people who actually want an allied government to suppress our enemies & send back the migrant hordes. On this front, we can safely say "steady as she goes."

I do have some anxiety for the long term however. It's no secret that I'm heavily against collectivism, something that many have incorrectly interpreted on here. Many feel that individualism has atomized our people, and stands to prevent racial consciousness. This is incorrect, I fully support racial identity. In fact, I support all forms of identity. Down to the individual. You see, leftism isn't actually individualist. They also don't care about racial identity. They believe in equality, to it's extreme. They don't just hate White people, they hate us because we stand so far above the rest of the world. It's the same driving force that makes them hate the rich, or the beautiful, or anything else the goes higher.

They are humanists, & globalists. The idea that some people or nations are better than the rest causes a vitriolic reaction in them. Because hierarchy & superiority are inevitable, this means they hate things being different at all. The Leftist dream is one where everyone is the same shade of brown, with the same IQ, with the same income, etc.

The individualistic drive, the *demiurge* drive, is the opposite. It relishes in separation & creation. It's perfectly fine with differentiation, & the inequality that comes with it. This drive, in its most pure form, is the egoism of Stirner or Nietzsche. Here, we have the breakdown into race, ethnicity, culture, and all other forms of identity that define specific nations & individuals.

I spoke of this at length in The Mission of the New Right, though I may go into more depth in the future.

Leftism, in its modern incarnation, is globalist & humanist. They believe that everything should be for society at large. That's why they think your income should be taxed & sent to subsidized some African tribe with an AIDS epidemic. Previously, Leftism took the form of Nationalism, during the 19th century. Russel Walter talked about this recently. The reason nationalism is a RW position now is because Lefties moved on to the whole world, meaning we must differentiate ourselves.

Eventually, when we defeat the specter of primordial communism, we won't need to be White as a primary identity. It would be redundant. At that point we can differentiate ourselves further, just as we did before our current threat. Eventually, this leads us to the America of 1776.

In 1776, all of the colonies had separate cultures. They were extremely similar, of course, as they all came from the same ethnic group & historical circumstances. But still, a Georgian & a New Yorker saw themselves as different due to their unique culture, caused by things like geography & the individuals present. This led to original American government, which ceded the bulk of its power to the states. Things like "federal law" were not even considered at the time, simply a handful of guiding principles & protections for individuals. The reason America was able to unite against the British was because of their shared identity, which set them apart from the UK & wider Anglosphere.

This, unfortunately, came to an end with the civil war. The last true American president was Jefferson Davis, who attempted to safeguard the meaning of the Revolution from the Republicans (Leftists of their day) to the North. The very concept of the Confederacy was directly in line with the Founders vision. People can argue about whether the war was about "states' rights" or "slavery," but in reality it symbolized so much more. The present state of the South, compared to its antebellum glory, is emblematic of the modern struggle for Europe & America at large.

I'll return to the fear I spoke of earlier, the fear that today's RW misses the forest for the trees. Unfortunately, we don't live in an age where living on a mountain in northern Idaho is an effective means to win. There's no frontier to escape towards. This has led many to, accurately, say that we must unite as a race. This is absolutely true, but only until the war is won. In the future, when White racial consciousness is back & the enemies exiled from our lands, it won't be true anymore. At that point, there's little holding the Slavs & the Anglos together.

And they shouldn't stay together either. They have their own genetics, cultures, histories. Their own identity, which they will act on appropriately. Collectivism is alien to the White man, especially as you go further West. It's a recipe for failure.

The Roman Empire is impossible, the freedom cry is inevitable. The best case is one akin to the Holy Roman Empire or original United States. Simple, guiding shared principles while leaving the specifics to the appropriate identities.

I brought this up previously, but will do so again. The ancient Germanics were freedom fighters. They knew full well that they were all Germanics, and thus different from the Slavs or Romans. And yet, they still had difficulty uniting under one banner. They saw no reason as to why their tribe should follow in step with another, with its own unique way of life. Yet when the Romans were at the gates, threatening them all, Arminius unified them all to fight the enemy. After they secured their lands, they returned to their tribal confederation. Similar instances occurred with the Celts under Vercingetorix & Greeks at Marathon.

When under threat, unity is necessary. In our age, the entire race is under threat. Therefore, we must unite along racial lines. Once this threat is dealt with, we can move in to smaller communities. It's important to not lose sight of this. I've seen people try to outline some sort of pan-European empire, which is simply impossible. It will either be as useless as the UN or as subversive as the EU. The only way this works is if one group takes over the rest, forming a sort of aristocratic class above the rest. Alternatively, a very loose confederation that doesn't touch on values not shared by everyone from Glasgow to Vladivostok, which would be virtually meaningless.

After Whites are secure, different groups will continue to have radically different philosophies & ways of life. This will, as it always has, lead to warfare & other disagreements. This is simply the way of the world, and genetically predetermined by Aryan blood.

This is why authoritarian states are predicated on having an outside enemy. In many cases, this is true. Hitler had virtually the entire world to contend with, Arminius had the Legions of Rome. In absence of a serious threat, warriors turn their rifles inwards to secure freedom for their tribe, clan, family & themselves. It's a delicate balancing act.

"In times of peace, the warlike man attacks himself” - Friedrich Nietzsche, this can be extrapolated to entire peoples as well.

In one of my planned books, I plan outlining the framework of an "ideal state" somewhat. Mainly, how we can protect ourselves from outside threats (especially ideological) while preserving the individualist spirit that makes Whites & Americans unique. Otherwise, it defeats the purpose of White identity. Of course, all of this comes after the threat is gone.

Hail Victory.