The post-war liberal, moralist consensus has marred and maligned the very idea of nationalism so irrevocably that it has become synonymous with racism. But it is not racism: it is a love of one’s own, a love which is in fact deeply human. We would do well to remember this fact—especially in the wake of Trump’s reelection and a populist resurgence across the West.
Great speech. One begins to wonder how many writers like Renaud Camus have been defenestrated with little but a shred of merit. The rediscovery of Western thinkers who foresaw the managerial regime and the West's demographic replacement en masse are now worthy of consideration more than ever before.
I guess the problem will be for people to understand this process and resist it without being dismissed and demonized as "right wingers" rednecks, fascists etc. How do we communicate that this anti-colonialist resistance is based on love ,as you defined it, and not on hatred or xenophobia?
By explaining through words and exemplifying through actions that this is the goal. At least to me, actual racism is still distasteful and, at times, abhorrent. This does not include jokes and banter, but it does necessarily involve civility and kindness toward people from other cultures.
The system that the elites are trying to replace is far less resilient to trauma and is already collapsing before its construction is complete. The architects had too much hope in a platonic utopia and not enough pragmatic understanding on what makes a resilient culture rather than the one they were designing from aesthetic and solipsistic principles. If the elites had been smart (and perhaps some generations ago they were, but the system they created now seems to be on a zombie autopilot now) they would have aimed at creating an antifragile culture where the bumps, knocks and unexpected trauma made it stronger. Instead they designed and implemented a future for western culture that's drifted inexorably into mediocrity and senesce, easily replaced by a predator culture that's less benign but far more vigorous.
Excellent. I have in the past described our leaders having no loyalty to their historic people/citizenry, which is essentially the same as saying they don’t love them. I believe this reality is just starting to be recognized by normies and perhaps not consciously yet, but there is a buzz in the background that people feel. This needs to be amplified further.
I have no idea why the clarifying reality expressed in Upheaval reports doesn't dominate comment sections across Substack. I suspect, perpetual comment section complaints about the symptoms of the disease, allows a shirking of the personal citizen responsibility necessary to confront the disease itself. The American psyche, both nationally, and on an individual level is wounded. The world is wounded. The vulnerability inherent in accepting the power to heal can be a frightening prospect.
The psyop is real. Its success, the threat, built on repression of the truth, and the injection of fear into the national conversation, is also real. The attempted imprisonment of American consciousness inside the propagandist iconoclastic manufactured hyperrealism of life cancellation, career destruction, rumor, character assassination and, the self-justifyied looting and exploitation of the world's resources, is purely the result of the pathological hypocrisy of those perpetrating it. Possible escape from their cash register sterility, the survival of human moral reason, the lines of moral demarcation that our founding fathers worked hard to include in the American Constitution, are the responsible agents for the emergence of this new "populism". Want a free America? Be a free American.
At the risk of adding an off note to your inevitable Amen corner, how do you deal with the fact that some native(ist?) cultures don’t deserve unqualified love?
I’m an American, and I’m as proud of Ben Franklin, the Wright Brothers, and Steve Jobs as anyone you know. But I’m not so hot on slavery till 1863, lynching till the 1930s, and gunboat diplomacy—we want Greenland!—to this very day.
Your argument is very intellectually seductive. Couched in pure abstractions, and put positively—we love ours, we don’t hate theirs—who could disagree?
But we all know that to love ours is to hate theirs. After all, their very presence harms what we love by diluting it, changing it, destroying it, no? Isn’t that what you mean but are too careful to say so?
We’ve heard your argument before. The last time, the shorthand for it was “Blood and Soil.” The last time, the “flattening” “replacists” were called “rootless cosmopolitans,” which of course was code for Jews.
I think you are recycling the old libels in more modern language. I would tell you to be ashamed of yourself, but I think you already are. Else why write under a pseudonym?
If someone in your family, who you love, is behaving badly, what do you do? Hopefully deliver some tough love/straight criticism in attempt to get them to better themselves. Indeed you do this because you love them. I never said anything about "unqualified" love, or never criticizing one's own nation. And no, one does not need to hate other people's families because you love your own. But you do put your responsibilities to your own first.
I like your metaphor. Does putting your family first include staging an intervention when a relative wants to make a mixed marriage? Or do you let people be people and simply love the new member of the family, too?
Mixed marriage is going to happen in the modern liberal world. It's programmed to happen.
Ideally, if you are a white guy, you would live in a sociaty that doesn't punish you with no-fault divorce and divorce court rape. Also, you wouldn't have a sexual revolution. LOL.
Legal immigration is allowing neighbors to marry into the family, or to be adopted into it. No one says you shouldn’t love your family most. The issue is whether you open your arms to additions to the family, or just keep inbreeding.
"Blood and Soil" was a perversion of a perfectly valid, virtuous notion: Home and Family. We do well to avoid the former, but shouldn't jettison the latter along with it.
Bright light casts a deep shadow. Exploitation of those polarities has been the primary weapon used to subvert the healthy truth/fact based American national conversation We the People deserve. And must actively demand. The war is/has been the repression of human consciousness and the enslavement of free peoples for the exploitation of labor and natural resources. The walking wounded are everywhere. There is the American Republic, its Constitution and the free citizen. Everything else is psyop.
"..snap out of it baby..people are jealous of you..they smile in your face but behind your back they hiss..what's a sweetheart like you doing in a place like this..? B.Dylan
None of it will matter if we don’t start having more kids and bring them up in a way that dismantles the system from the ground up. Being able to revolt is all nice and dandy, but you don’t fight this off by being outnumbered.
Your kIds will be captured by the sacred victim, entitled parasite culture. Human rights is the mechanism, the god. Peer group pressure trumps biology.
Can group identification and love for one's own ever occur without coming at the expense of looking down on other groups, cultures, and people?
Social identity theory shows us that group identification is almost always tied to boosting self-image—ie instinctively attributing positive traits to one's group and negative traits to outsiders.
As I see it, the only way to break free from this madness—this toxic form of identity and group-based thinking that traps the vast majority of the world’s population, especially in their adopted countries—is to make people care less about their identities and groups.
The problem is that they attach their sense of purpose and meaning in life to identity and belonging (mere accidents of birth), rather than to creation and meaningful work.
This would require jettisoning the most basic elements of human anthropology, everywhere and at all times. It is madness and, worse, doomed in advance to failure. Figure that out and propose something else. Failing that, how can one take you seriously?
Resistance is futile. This is the way of things. Always has been, always will be. Ask the Celts, Teutons or Kiawah. You/we are not exempt. It’s good and right to be patriotic, but nationalism is an illusion and a sickness. The Earth is our country.
Not a hatred of others but a love of one's own...excellent.
The post-war liberal, moralist consensus has marred and maligned the very idea of nationalism so irrevocably that it has become synonymous with racism. But it is not racism: it is a love of one’s own, a love which is in fact deeply human. We would do well to remember this fact—especially in the wake of Trump’s reelection and a populist resurgence across the West.
Great speech. One begins to wonder how many writers like Renaud Camus have been defenestrated with little but a shred of merit. The rediscovery of Western thinkers who foresaw the managerial regime and the West's demographic replacement en masse are now worthy of consideration more than ever before.
I guess the problem will be for people to understand this process and resist it without being dismissed and demonized as "right wingers" rednecks, fascists etc. How do we communicate that this anti-colonialist resistance is based on love ,as you defined it, and not on hatred or xenophobia?
By explaining through words and exemplifying through actions that this is the goal. At least to me, actual racism is still distasteful and, at times, abhorrent. This does not include jokes and banter, but it does necessarily involve civility and kindness toward people from other cultures.
The system that the elites are trying to replace is far less resilient to trauma and is already collapsing before its construction is complete. The architects had too much hope in a platonic utopia and not enough pragmatic understanding on what makes a resilient culture rather than the one they were designing from aesthetic and solipsistic principles. If the elites had been smart (and perhaps some generations ago they were, but the system they created now seems to be on a zombie autopilot now) they would have aimed at creating an antifragile culture where the bumps, knocks and unexpected trauma made it stronger. Instead they designed and implemented a future for western culture that's drifted inexorably into mediocrity and senesce, easily replaced by a predator culture that's less benign but far more vigorous.
Excellent. I have in the past described our leaders having no loyalty to their historic people/citizenry, which is essentially the same as saying they don’t love them. I believe this reality is just starting to be recognized by normies and perhaps not consciously yet, but there is a buzz in the background that people feel. This needs to be amplified further.
I have no idea why the clarifying reality expressed in Upheaval reports doesn't dominate comment sections across Substack. I suspect, perpetual comment section complaints about the symptoms of the disease, allows a shirking of the personal citizen responsibility necessary to confront the disease itself. The American psyche, both nationally, and on an individual level is wounded. The world is wounded. The vulnerability inherent in accepting the power to heal can be a frightening prospect.
The psyop is real. Its success, the threat, built on repression of the truth, and the injection of fear into the national conversation, is also real. The attempted imprisonment of American consciousness inside the propagandist iconoclastic manufactured hyperrealism of life cancellation, career destruction, rumor, character assassination and, the self-justifyied looting and exploitation of the world's resources, is purely the result of the pathological hypocrisy of those perpetrating it. Possible escape from their cash register sterility, the survival of human moral reason, the lines of moral demarcation that our founding fathers worked hard to include in the American Constitution, are the responsible agents for the emergence of this new "populism". Want a free America? Be a free American.
Got Constitution? Depart the psyop and live.
At the risk of adding an off note to your inevitable Amen corner, how do you deal with the fact that some native(ist?) cultures don’t deserve unqualified love?
I’m an American, and I’m as proud of Ben Franklin, the Wright Brothers, and Steve Jobs as anyone you know. But I’m not so hot on slavery till 1863, lynching till the 1930s, and gunboat diplomacy—we want Greenland!—to this very day.
Your argument is very intellectually seductive. Couched in pure abstractions, and put positively—we love ours, we don’t hate theirs—who could disagree?
But we all know that to love ours is to hate theirs. After all, their very presence harms what we love by diluting it, changing it, destroying it, no? Isn’t that what you mean but are too careful to say so?
We’ve heard your argument before. The last time, the shorthand for it was “Blood and Soil.” The last time, the “flattening” “replacists” were called “rootless cosmopolitans,” which of course was code for Jews.
I think you are recycling the old libels in more modern language. I would tell you to be ashamed of yourself, but I think you already are. Else why write under a pseudonym?
If someone in your family, who you love, is behaving badly, what do you do? Hopefully deliver some tough love/straight criticism in attempt to get them to better themselves. Indeed you do this because you love them. I never said anything about "unqualified" love, or never criticizing one's own nation. And no, one does not need to hate other people's families because you love your own. But you do put your responsibilities to your own first.
I like your metaphor. Does putting your family first include staging an intervention when a relative wants to make a mixed marriage? Or do you let people be people and simply love the new member of the family, too?
Mixed marriage is going to happen in the modern liberal world. It's programmed to happen.
Ideally, if you are a white guy, you would live in a sociaty that doesn't punish you with no-fault divorce and divorce court rape. Also, you wouldn't have a sexual revolution. LOL.
do you have any real proof that N.S is recycling the old blood libels and veiled accusations against Jews or is this a straw man?
what he wrote seems fairly explicit and clear to me. just because you love your family does not mean you hate your neighbor. pretty simple logic.
this is a bad faith argument to make.
Legal immigration is allowing neighbors to marry into the family, or to be adopted into it. No one says you shouldn’t love your family most. The issue is whether you open your arms to additions to the family, or just keep inbreeding.
"Blood and Soil" was a perversion of a perfectly valid, virtuous notion: Home and Family. We do well to avoid the former, but shouldn't jettison the latter along with it.
In what way was it a perversion and not just a catchy way of saying the same thing?
Bright light casts a deep shadow. Exploitation of those polarities has been the primary weapon used to subvert the healthy truth/fact based American national conversation We the People deserve. And must actively demand. The war is/has been the repression of human consciousness and the enslavement of free peoples for the exploitation of labor and natural resources. The walking wounded are everywhere. There is the American Republic, its Constitution and the free citizen. Everything else is psyop.
"..snap out of it baby..people are jealous of you..they smile in your face but behind your back they hiss..what's a sweetheart like you doing in a place like this..? B.Dylan
Oikophilia when united with the guidelines offered in the Sermon on the Mount can go a long way towards recovering our nations & culture.
None of it will matter if we don’t start having more kids and bring them up in a way that dismantles the system from the ground up. Being able to revolt is all nice and dandy, but you don’t fight this off by being outnumbered.
Your kIds will be captured by the sacred victim, entitled parasite culture. Human rights is the mechanism, the god. Peer group pressure trumps biology.
Can group identification and love for one's own ever occur without coming at the expense of looking down on other groups, cultures, and people?
Social identity theory shows us that group identification is almost always tied to boosting self-image—ie instinctively attributing positive traits to one's group and negative traits to outsiders.
As I see it, the only way to break free from this madness—this toxic form of identity and group-based thinking that traps the vast majority of the world’s population, especially in their adopted countries—is to make people care less about their identities and groups.
The problem is that they attach their sense of purpose and meaning in life to identity and belonging (mere accidents of birth), rather than to creation and meaningful work.
People only migrate in one direction. That ought to tell you something.
This would require jettisoning the most basic elements of human anthropology, everywhere and at all times. It is madness and, worse, doomed in advance to failure. Figure that out and propose something else. Failing that, how can one take you seriously?
Resistance is futile. This is the way of things. Always has been, always will be. Ask the Celts, Teutons or Kiawah. You/we are not exempt. It’s good and right to be patriotic, but nationalism is an illusion and a sickness. The Earth is our country.
Do you not get that we are the Celts, Teutons and Kiawah?